Rusty's kernel-hacking guides provide important information, however
they are written in a narrative style that some readers may interpret as
off-putting. Since the goal is to make kernel documentation accessible
to as many new developers as possible, it's best to avoid the turns of
phrase that require a specific cultural context to properly understand.
Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ryabitsev <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst | 36 ++++++++++++------------
Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 5 +---
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
index 55bd37a2efb0..ebd9d90882ea 100644
--- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
+++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
@@ -112,8 +112,7 @@ time, although different tasklets can run simultaneously.
.. warning::
The name 'tasklet' is misleading: they have nothing to do with
- 'tasks', and probably more to do with some bad vodka Alexey
- Kuznetsov had at the time.
+ 'tasks'.
You can tell you are in a softirq (or tasklet) using the
:c:func:`in_softirq()` macro (``include/linux/preempt.h``).
@@ -290,8 +289,8 @@ userspace.
Unlike :c:func:`put_user()` and :c:func:`get_user()`, they
return the amount of uncopied data (ie. 0 still means success).
-[Yes, this moronic interface makes me cringe. The flamewar comes up
-every year or so. --RR.]
+[Yes, this objectionable interface makes me cringe. The flamewar comes
+up every year or so. --RR.]
The functions may sleep implicitly. This should never be called outside
user context (it makes no sense), with interrupts disabled, or a
@@ -645,8 +644,9 @@ names in development kernels; this is not done just to keep everyone on
their toes: it reflects a fundamental change (eg. can no longer be
called with interrupts on, or does extra checks, or doesn't do checks
which were caught before). Usually this is accompanied by a fairly
-complete note to the linux-kernel mailing list; search the archive.
-Simply doing a global replace on the file usually makes things **worse**.
+complete note to the appropriate kernel development mailing list; search
+the archives. Simply doing a global replace on the file usually makes
+things **worse**.
Initializing structure members
------------------------------
@@ -723,14 +723,14 @@ Putting Your Stuff in the Kernel
In order to get your stuff into shape for official inclusion, or even to
make a neat patch, there's administrative work to be done:
-- Figure out whose pond you've been pissing in. Look at the top of the
- source files, inside the ``MAINTAINERS`` file, and last of all in the
- ``CREDITS`` file. You should coordinate with this person to make sure
- you're not duplicating effort, or trying something that's already
- been rejected.
+- Figure out who are the owners of the code you've been modifying. Look
+ at the top of the source files, inside the ``MAINTAINERS`` file, and
+ last of all in the ``CREDITS`` file. You should coordinate with these
+ people to make sure you're not duplicating effort, or trying something
+ that's already been rejected.
- Make sure you put your name and EMail address at the top of any files
- you create or mangle significantly. This is the first place people
+ Make sure you put your name and email address at the top of any files
+ you create or modify significantly. This is the first place people
will look when they find a bug, or when **they** want to make a change.
- Usually you want a configuration option for your kernel hack. Edit
@@ -748,11 +748,11 @@ make a neat patch, there's administrative work to be done:
can usually just add a "obj-$(CONFIG_xxx) += xxx.o" line. The syntax
is documented in ``Documentation/kbuild/makefiles.rst``.
-- Put yourself in ``CREDITS`` if you've done something noteworthy,
- usually beyond a single file (your name should be at the top of the
- source files anyway). ``MAINTAINERS`` means you want to be consulted
- when changes are made to a subsystem, and hear about bugs; it implies
- a more-than-passing commitment to some part of the code.
+- Put yourself in ``CREDITS`` if you consider what you've done
+ noteworthy, usually beyond a single file (your name should be at the
+ top of the source files anyway). ``MAINTAINERS`` means you want to be
+ consulted when changes are made to a subsystem, and hear about bugs;
+ it implies a more-than-passing commitment to some part of the code.
- Finally, don't forget to read
``Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst`` and possibly
diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
index 4cbd50edf277..6805ae6e86e6 100644
--- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
+++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst
@@ -941,8 +941,7 @@ lock.
A classic problem here is when you provide callbacks or hooks: if you
call these with the lock held, you risk simple deadlock, or a deadly
-embrace (who knows what the callback will do?). Remember, the other
-programmers are out to get you, so don't do this.
+embrace (who knows what the callback will do?).
Overzealous Prevention Of Deadlocks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@@ -952,8 +951,6 @@ grabs a read lock, searches a list, fails to find what it wants, drops
the read lock, grabs a write lock and inserts the object has a race
condition.
-If you don't see why, please stay away from my code.
-
Racing Timers: A Kernel Pastime
-------------------------------
--
2.35.1
Konstantin Ryabitsev <[email protected]> writes:
> Rusty's kernel-hacking guides provide important information, however
> they are written in a narrative style that some readers may interpret as
> off-putting. Since the goal is to make kernel documentation accessible
> to as many new developers as possible, it's best to avoid the turns of
> phrase that require a specific cultural context to properly understand.
>
> Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ryabitsev <[email protected]>
> ---
> Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst | 36 ++++++++++++------------
> Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 5 +---
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
*Sigh*...it's kind of sad to see the character of Rusty's writing being
chipped away over time; this isn't the first sanitization patch applied
to this file. It certainly needs a lot more work than this to match
current practice. Oh well, I've applied it, thanks.
jon