Re: [PATCH] Documentation: in_irq() cleanup

[Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>]

Changbin Du <changbin.du@gmail.com> writes:

> Replace the obsolete and ambiguos macro in_irq() with new
> macro in_hardirq().
>
> Signed-off-by: Changbin Du <changbin.du@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst                    | 2 +-
>  Documentation/kernel-hacking/locking.rst                    | 4 ++--
>  Documentation/translations/it_IT/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst | 2 +-
>  Documentation/translations/it_IT/kernel-hacking/locking.rst | 4 ++--
>  Documentation/translations/zh_CN/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst | 2 +-
>  5 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
> index df65c19aa7df..f514cec8e16b 100644
> --- a/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/kernel-hacking/hacking.rst
> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ fast: frequently it simply acknowledges the interrupt, marks a 'software
>  interrupt' for execution and exits.
>  
>  You can tell you are in a hardware interrupt, because
> -:c:func:`in_irq()` returns true.
> +:c:func:`in_hardirq()` returns true.

While you're in the neighborhood, can you please get rid of the :c:func:
markup?  We've not needed that for some time now; simply saying
in_hardirq() is sufficient.

Thanks,

jon