On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 10:33 PM Tamir Duberstein <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> This title is consistent with all other macros' documentation,
> regardless of the number of examples contained in their "Examples"
> sections.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tamir Duberstein <[email protected]>
I was going to say that I could take this one independently, but we
already had #1 of:
https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/[email protected]/
I will take that one (which given the `checkpatch.pl` one got stalled,
I should have taken it separately as I mentioned at some point).
Patrick/Hridesh: there are new cases arriving (i.e. singular section
names), so it would be great if the `checkpatch.pl` patch discussion
could be restarted to see if we can land it, i.e. there is now even
more justification behind it just after some months. Thanks!
Cheers,
Miguel
