"get" doesn't properly fit as an antonym for "release" in the context
of locking. Correct it with "acquire".

Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst
index 68e3651e8af925..acb90164929e32 100644
--- a/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst
+++ b/Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst
@@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ some limitations, see below.
 3. Consistency model
 ====================
 
-Functions are there for a reason. They take some input parameters, get or
+Functions are there for a reason. They take some input parameters, acquire or
 release locks, read, process, and even write some data in a defined way,
 have return values. In other words, each function has a defined semantic.
 
-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

On Tue 2024-09-03 09:47:53, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> "get" doesn't properly fit as an antonym for "release" in the context
> of locking. Correct it with "acquire".
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>

The patch is trivial. I have have committed it into livepatching.git,
branch for-6.12/trivial.

Best Regards,
Petr

On 9/4/24 18:48, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Tue 2024-09-03 09:47:53, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> "get" doesn't properly fit as an antonym for "release" in the context
>> of locking. Correct it with "acquire".
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
> 
> The patch is trivial. I have have committed it into livepatching.git,
> branch for-6.12/trivial.
> 

Shouldn't this for 6.11 instead? I'm expecting that though...

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

On Tue 2024-09-10 17:27:42, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On 9/4/24 18:48, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Tue 2024-09-03 09:47:53, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > > "get" doesn't properly fit as an antonym for "release" in the context
> > > of locking. Correct it with "acquire".
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
> > 
> > The patch is trivial. I have have committed it into livepatching.git,
> > branch for-6.12/trivial.
> > 
> 
> Shouldn't this for 6.11 instead? I'm expecting that though...

I am sorry but the change is not urgent enough to be rushed into 6.11.

Best Regards,
Petr

On 9/10/24 18:01, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Tue 2024-09-10 17:27:42, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> On 9/4/24 18:48, Petr Mladek wrote:
>>> On Tue 2024-09-03 09:47:53, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>>>> "get" doesn't properly fit as an antonym for "release" in the context
>>>> of locking. Correct it with "acquire".
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
>>>
>>> The patch is trivial. I have have committed it into livepatching.git,
>>> branch for-6.12/trivial.
>>>
>>
>> Shouldn't this for 6.11 instead? I'm expecting that though...
> 
> I am sorry but the change is not urgent enough to be rushed into 6.11.
> 

OK, thanks!

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara