On 6/25/19 8:52 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 13:33:27 +0000 > Gary R Hook <ghook@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> It's been "valid" since I wrote it...it's just not upstream yet :) I >>> expect it to be in 5.3, though. So the best way to refer to a kernel >>> function, going forward, is just function() with no markup needed. >> >> So I'm unclear: >> >> 1) would you prefer I wait on your 5.3 change being fully committed, >> 2) add your change to my local tree and use it, then submit an update >> patchset that depends upon it, or >> 3) re-submit now (using the current method) with suggested changes? > > I would just not mark up function() at all, and the right thing will > happen to it in the very near future. Done. I applied your two patches (locally) to verify the result, and it looks good to me. In the interim, I think it's NBD. Thanks much. grh
