Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To:     "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@igalia.com>,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gpiccoli@igalia.com,
        kernel@gpiccoli.net, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Fix duplicate statement about
 raw_spinlock_t type
In-Reply-To: <20220321144133.49804-1-gpiccoli@igalia.com>
References: <20220321144133.49804-1-gpiccoli@igalia.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 13:32:12 -0600
Message-ID: <87r16peslf.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

"Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@igalia.com> writes:

> Unless it was duplicate on purpose, to emphasize that a raw_spinlock_t
> is always a spinning lock regardless of PREEMPT_RT or kernel config,
> it's a bit odd that this text is duplicate. So, this patch just clean
> it up, keeping the consistency with the other sections of the text.
>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Fixes: 919e9e6395cf ("Documentation: Add lock ordering and nesting documentation")
> Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@igalia.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst | 3 ---
>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst b/Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst
> index bfa75ea1b66a..9933faad4771 100644
> --- a/Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/locking/locktypes.rst
> @@ -211,9 +211,6 @@ raw_spinlock_t and spinlock_t
>  raw_spinlock_t
>  --------------
>  
> -raw_spinlock_t is a strict spinning lock implementation regardless of the
> -kernel configuration including PREEMPT_RT enabled kernels.
> -
>  raw_spinlock_t is a strict spinning lock implementation in all kernels,
>  including PREEMPT_RT kernels.  Use raw_spinlock_t only in real critical
>  core code, low-level interrupt handling and places where disabling

I don't think that was intentional.  Applied, thanks.

For future reference, a far better changelog would have been something
like:

	Remove the duplicated sentence from locktypes.rst

Thanks,

jon