I've noticed that getting documentation patches merged seems to be a
slower and more uncertain process than it was a while back. So I
figured I'd try to be one of the cool folks with their own git tree and
see if that works better. Linus, if you agree, could you please pull:
git://git.lwn.net/linux-2.6.git docs
To get the following:
Jonathan Corbet (3):
Add the seq_file documentation
Fill out information on patch tags in SubmittingPatches
Add a comment discouraging use of in_atomic()
Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 54 ++++++-
Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX | 2 +
Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt | 283 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/hardirq.h | 8 +
4 files changed, 344 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
These changes are (1) an updated version of the seq_file document first
posted in 2003, (2) the much-reviewed patch tags documentation, and
(3) a comment warning developers that in_atomic() doesn't mean what they
think it means. No code changes.
If this works out, and nobody objects, I'll try to run this tree into
the future as a collection point for documentation patches which don't
have a more obvious tree to travel through.