![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Davide Libenzi wrote: | On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Randy.Dunlap wrote: | | > I expect this to be unpopular, but I've been saying lately that | > when new kernel APIs or syscalls or whatsoever are added to | > Linux, there should be sufficient docs along with the patch(es) | > explaining the patch and some intended uses of it, perhaps even | > with examples. Ingo does this sometimes. Some people don't | > bother to even come close. | > | > Leading by example would be a nice thing to see here. | | Hi Randy, no it's not unpopular :) Those were posted togheter with the | patch : | | http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/epoll.txt | http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/epoll_create.txt | http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/epoll_ctl.txt | http://www.xmailserver.org/linux-patches/epoll_wait.txt | | to try to explain the new API from user side. From kernel side epoll | completely uses the sk_wake_async() already available by many versions, | and also it is not expected to offer kernel services to other kernel | modules. Yes, I knew that and I thought about it while typing, but my dynamic RAM was too dynamic and not being refreshed often enough. Thanks for doing it for me. BTW, I didn't mean unpopular for the epoll patch, I meant unpopular in general, especially for development kernel patches: if every new feature required docs along with it, it might slow down Linux development by one day, but help out everyone in the long run (tm?). -- ~Randy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:30 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||