Re: [PATCH v1] docs/arch: remove deprecated function name

[Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>]

Jiayuan Chen <mrpre@163.com> writes:

> The dumpstack.c file has undergone many modifications, and the
> print_context_stack() function was removed or rewritten a long time ago,
> so it's better to remove the incorrect guidance. Additionally, no new
> functions will be added to the documentation, as it may be modified again
> in the future. Using 'question mark' and 'dumpstack' is sufficient to
> index this document.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiayuan Chen <mrpre@163.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/arch/x86/kernel-stacks.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/arch/x86/kernel-stacks.rst b/Documentation/arch/x86/kernel-stacks.rst
> index 738671a4070b..2d355e78008e 100644
> --- a/Documentation/arch/x86/kernel-stacks.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/arch/x86/kernel-stacks.rst
> @@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ Printing backtraces on x86
>  
>  The question about the '?' preceding function names in an x86 stacktrace
>  keeps popping up, here's an indepth explanation. It helps if the reader
> -stares at print_context_stack() and the whole machinery in and around
> +stares at 'question mark' and the whole machinery in and around
>  arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c.

Maybe - probably - I'm missing something, but I don't see how this is
going to help our readers?  If there *is* a function that will, by
virtue of being stared at, help bring enlightenment, why wouldn't we
name it?

Thanks,

jon