mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] docs/RCU/rcubarrier: Adjust 'Answer' parts of QQs as definition-lists
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2022 18:23:09 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b74e2e19-0317-e717-cc15-a7854b04adf4@gmail.com> (raw)

The "Answer" parts of QQs divert from proper format of definition-lists
as described at [1] and are not rendered as such.

Adjust them.

Link: [1] https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/rst/restructuredtext.html#definition-lists
Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.rst | 9 ++++++---
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.rst b/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.rst
index 5a643e5233d5..9fb9ed777355 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.rst
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/rcubarrier.rst
@@ -296,7 +296,8 @@ Quick Quiz #1:
 	Is there any other situation where rcu_barrier() might
 	be required?
 
-Answer: Interestingly enough, rcu_barrier() was not originally
+Answer:
+	Interestingly enough, rcu_barrier() was not originally
 	implemented for module unloading. Nikita Danilov was using
 	RCU in a filesystem, which resulted in a similar situation at
 	filesystem-unmount time. Dipankar Sarma coded up rcu_barrier()
@@ -315,7 +316,8 @@ Quick Quiz #2:
 	Why doesn't line 8 initialize rcu_barrier_cpu_count to zero,
 	thereby avoiding the need for lines 9 and 10?
 
-Answer: Suppose that the on_each_cpu() function shown on line 8 was
+Answer:
+	Suppose that the on_each_cpu() function shown on line 8 was
 	delayed, so that CPU 0's rcu_barrier_func() executed and
 	the corresponding grace period elapsed, all before CPU 1's
 	rcu_barrier_func() started executing.  This would result in
@@ -351,7 +353,8 @@ Quick Quiz #3:
 	are delayed for a full grace period? Couldn't this result in
 	rcu_barrier() returning prematurely?
 
-Answer: This cannot happen. The reason is that on_each_cpu() has its last
+Answer:
+	This cannot happen. The reason is that on_each_cpu() has its last
 	argument, the wait flag, set to "1". This flag is passed through
 	to smp_call_function() and further to smp_call_function_on_cpu(),
 	causing this latter to spin until the cross-CPU invocation of

base-commit: 741cfda870057958c53f9cb0b21ac33f531baaf4
-- 
2.25.1


             reply	other threads:[~2022-11-23  9:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-23  9:23 Akira Yokosawa [this message]
2022-11-23  9:29 ` [PATCH 2/2] docs/RCU/rcubarrier: Right-adjust line numbers in code snippets Akira Yokosawa
2022-11-23 18:32 ` [PATCH 1/2] docs/RCU/rcubarrier: Adjust 'Answer' parts of QQs as definition-lists Paul E. McKenney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=b74e2e19-0317-e717-cc15-a7854b04adf4@gmail.com \
    --to=akiyks@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
    --cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®