Re: [PATCH] Documentation: refcount-vs-atomic: Update reference to LKMM doc.

[Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>]

On Fri, May 04, 2018 at 02:13:59PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 2:11 PM, Andrea Parri
> <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com> wrote:
> > The LKMM project has moved to 'tools/memory-model/'.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri <andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/core-api/refcount-vs-atomic.rst | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/refcount-vs-atomic.rst b/Documentation/core-api/refcount-vs-atomic.rst
> > index 83351c258cdb9..322851bada167 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/core-api/refcount-vs-atomic.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/core-api/refcount-vs-atomic.rst
> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ in order to help maintainers validate their code against the change in
> >  these memory ordering guarantees.
> >
> >  The terms used through this document try to follow the formal LKMM defined in
> > -github.com/aparri/memory-model/blob/master/Documentation/explanation.txt
> > +tools/memory-model/Documentation/explanation.txt.
> >
> >  memory-barriers.txt and atomic_t.txt provide more background to the
> >  memory ordering in general and for atomic operations specifically.
> 
> Will this get linkified by rst ?

I believe not, but I'm not too familiar with rst...  FWIW, I'm seeing that
the above memory-barriers.txt, atomic_t.txt are not linkified.

  Andrea


> 
> -Kees
> 
> -- 
> Kees Cook
> Pixel Security