Re: [PATCH] genirq: describe IRQF_COND_SUSPEND

Mark Rutland
2015-03-05T12:07:33Z

On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 11:33:06AM +0000, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 05/03/2015 at 11:04:11 +0000, Mark Rutland wrote :
> > > > +In rare cases an IRQ can be shared between a wakeup device driver and an
> > > > +IRQF_NO_SUSPEND user. In order for this to be safe, the wakeup device driver
> > > > +must be able to discern spurious IRQs from genuine wakeup events (signalling
> > >
> > > And genuine question, should we use British English or American English
> > > or we don't care ?
> >
> > Have I written something that isn't valid American English there? I read
> > over this a few times and failed to spot anything obvious.
> >
> > I'm happy to change for consistency, I generally assume that's the most
> > important thing.
>
> I'd say signalling vs signaling. I actually had to look up which one was
> correct. I'm personally using Incorrect/Broken English so I'm definitely
> not here to give lessons.

Easy option to keep everyone happy: s/signalling/indicating/

That should be valid for the English variants I'm aware of, and it has
the same number of characters so we don't need to reflow the text.

Mark.