Quoting Jonathan Corbet (2020-03-18 07:55:42) > On Tue, 17 Mar 2020 22:44:25 -0700 > Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Add the missing word to make this sentence read properly. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst > > index a8518ac0d31d..9850c1e52607 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst > > @@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ by a hardware interrupt on another CPU. This is where > > interrupts on that cpu, then grab the lock. > > :c:func:`spin_unlock_irq()` does the reverse. > > > > -The irq handler does not to use :c:func:`spin_lock_irq()`, because > > +The irq handler does not need to use :c:func:`spin_lock_irq()`, because > > Please take out the :c:func: stuff while you're at it, we don't need that > anymore. Just spin_lock_irq() will do the right thing. > Ok. I'll make two patches then to remove func throughout this file and you can decide to squash them or not.
