Re: [PATCH] genirq: describe IRQF_COND_SUSPEND

Alexandre Belloni
2015-03-05T11:34:16Z

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.

--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering