[Linux-kernel-mentees] [PATCH 2/2] Documentation: RCU: arrayRCU: Improve format for arrayRCU.rst

madhuparnabhowmik04 at gmail.com madhuparnabhowmik04 at gmail.com
Tue Nov 5 21:29:27 UTC 2019

From: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04 at gmail.com>

This patch adds cross-references and fixes a few formtting issues.

Signed-off-by: Madhuparna Bhowmik <madhuparnabhowmik04 at gmail.com>
 Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst | 16 ++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst b/Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst
index ed5ae24b196e..30c007edfbfb 100644
--- a/Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst
+++ b/Documentation/RCU/arrayRCU.rst
@@ -6,16 +6,16 @@ Using RCU to Protect Read-Mostly Arrays
 Although RCU is more commonly used to protect linked lists, it can
 also be used to protect arrays.  Three situations are as follows:
-1.  Hash Tables
+1.  :ref:`Hash Tables <hash_tables>`
-2.  Static Arrays
+2.  :ref:`Static Arrays <static_arrays>`
-3.  Resizeable Arrays
+3.  :ref:`Resizeable Arrays <resizeable_arrays>`
 Each of these three situations involves an RCU-protected pointer to an
 array that is separately indexed.  It might be tempting to consider use
 of RCU to instead protect the index into an array, however, this use
-case is -not- supported.  The problem with RCU-protected indexes into
+case is **not** supported.  The problem with RCU-protected indexes into
 arrays is that compilers can play way too many optimization games with
 integers, which means that the rules governing handling of these indexes
 are far more trouble than they are worth.  If RCU-protected indexes into
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ to be safely used.
 That aside, each of the three RCU-protected pointer situations are
 described in the following sections.
+.. _hash_tables:
 Situation 1: Hash Tables
@@ -35,6 +36,7 @@ has a linked-list hash chain.  Each hash chain can be protected by RCU
 as described in the listRCU.txt document.  This approach also applies
 to other array-of-list situations, such as radix trees.
+.. _static_arrays:
 Situation 2: Static Arrays
@@ -50,6 +52,8 @@ Quick Quiz:
 :ref:`Answer to Quick Quiz <answer_quick_quiz_seqlock>`
+.. _resizeable_arrays:
 Situation 3: Resizeable Arrays
@@ -66,7 +70,7 @@ the remainder of the new, updates the ids->entries pointer to point to
 the new array, and invokes ipc_rcu_putref() to free up the old array.
 Note that rcu_assign_pointer() is used to update the ids->entries pointer,
 which includes any memory barriers required on whatever architecture
-you are running on.::
+you are running on::
 	static int grow_ary(struct ipc_ids* ids, int newsize)
@@ -118,7 +122,7 @@ a simple check suffices.  The pointer to the structure corresponding
 to the desired IPC object is placed in "out", with NULL indicating
 a non-existent entry.  After acquiring "out->lock", the "out->deleted"
 flag indicates whether the IPC object is in the process of being
-deleted, and, if not, the pointer is returned.::
+deleted, and, if not, the pointer is returned::
 	struct kern_ipc_perm* ipc_lock(struct ipc_ids* ids, int id)

More information about the Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list