Re: [PATCH] docs: locking: Add 'need' to hardirq section

[Stephen Boyd]

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.