On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 10:20:53AM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote:
> The passed "ptr" parameter might be wrongly interpreted
> therefore rephrase it to prevent people from being confused.
>
> Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
Thank you both! Queued with wordsmithed commit log as shown below,
so please check to see if I messed anything up.
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit 59ef229194204b023bb7bde95ce769d4e94a4b62
Author: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed Dec 1 10:20:53 2021 +0100
rcu: Fix description of kvfree_rcu()
The kvfree_rcu() header comment's description of the "ptr" parameter
is unclear, therefore rephrase it to make it clear that it is a pointer
to the memory to eventually be passed to kvfree().
Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
index 88b42eb464068..9d7df8d36af07 100644
--- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
+++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
@@ -924,7 +924,7 @@ static inline notrace void rcu_read_unlock_sched_notrace(void)
*
* kvfree_rcu(ptr);
*
- * where @ptr is a pointer to kvfree().
+ * where @ptr is the pointer to be freed by kvfree().
*
* Please note, head-less way of freeing is permitted to
* use from a context that has to follow might_sleep()
