Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   =?UTF-8?q?Jonathan=20Neusch=C3=A4fer?= <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net>
To:     linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Jade Alglave <j.alglave@ucl.ac.uk>,
        Luc Maranget <luc.maranget@inria.fr>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>,
        Daniel Lustig <dlustig@nvidia.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
        =?UTF-8?q?Jonathan=20Neusch=C3=A4fer?= <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net>
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] docs: atomic_ops: Move two paragraphs into the warning block above
Date:   Sun,  8 Mar 2020 20:56:17 +0100
Message-Id: <20200308195618.22768-3-j.neuschaefer@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <20200308195618.22768-1-j.neuschaefer@gmx.net>
References: <20200308195618.22768-1-j.neuschaefer@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

These two paragraphs seem to be semantically part of the warning text,
so let's adjust the formatting accordingly.

Signed-off-by: Jonathan Neusch=C3=A4fer <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net>
=2D--
 Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst | 16 ++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst b/Documentation/core-ap=
i/atomic_ops.rst
index 650b9693469a..73033fc954ad 100644
=2D-- a/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst
+++ b/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst
@@ -473,14 +473,14 @@ operation.
         above to return "long" and just returning something like "old_val=
 &
         mask" because that will not work.

-For one thing, this return value gets truncated to int in many code
-paths using these interfaces, so on 64-bit if the bit is set in the
-upper 32-bits then testers will never see that.
-
-One great example of where this problem crops up are the thread_info
-flag operations.  Routines such as test_and_set_ti_thread_flag() chop
-the return value into an int.  There are other places where things
-like this occur as well.
+        For one thing, this return value gets truncated to int in many co=
de
+        paths using these interfaces, so on 64-bit if the bit is set in t=
he
+        upper 32-bits then testers will never see that.
+
+        One great example of where this problem crops up are the thread_i=
nfo
+        flag operations.  Routines such as test_and_set_ti_thread_flag() =
chop
+        the return value into an int.  There are other places where thing=
s
+        like this occur as well.

 These routines, like the atomic_t counter operations returning values,
 must provide explicit memory barrier semantics around their execution.
=2D-
2.20.1