Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 May 2007 17:19:53 +0200 | From | Jarek Poplawski <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: various fixes |
| |
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:12:07PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl> wrote: > > > > > - load will be directed), a data dependency barrier would be required to > > > > + load will be directed), the data dependency barrier would be required to > > > > > > I think that should be "a". > > > > I could only guess (it's a magic to me) - so, if it doesn't matter > > "A data ..." begins this paragraph... > > I see what you mean. I see it as "a data dependency barrier ..." though. That > may be because I wrote the doc, however. I wonder if "data dependency" should > be hyphenated to make it clearer. What do you think?
Better don't ask. Now I'm far less decided, than yesterday.
> > > > > -But! CPU 2's perception of P may be updated _before_ its perception of B, thus > > > > +But (!) CPU 2's perception of P may be updated _before_ its perception of B, > > > > > > That's a matter of taste, I think. However, if my solution is chosen, there > > > should be an extra space after "But!". Hmmm... actually, I think you're wrong > > > because the "But!" isn't quite part of the following sentence. > > > > It seems logical, but it's also quite unusual, so the reader (only me?) > > could be more interested in orthography than in the subject... > > I'm emphasising a really odd feature - and it's quite an important emphasis - > so I felt that this sort of construct would interrupt the reader's normal > scanning of the text and make it clearer that this was something to take > careful note of. > > It's a really horrible gotcha you have to be careful of. It's sort of against > how you'd think things would work. > > > > > This sequence of events is committed to the memory coherence system in an order > > > > that the rest of the system might perceive as the unordered set of { STORE A, > > > > -STORE B, STORE C } all occurring before the unordered set of { STORE D, STORE E > > > > -}: > > > > +STORE B, STORE C } - all occurring before the unordered set of { STORE D, STORE > > > > +E }: > > > > > > Hmmm. I don't think that a dash is correct here. I think it changes the > > > meaning, by changing the way the elements are grouped. > > > > Sure. But on the other hand such long questions probably are broken > > somewhere with pauses when reading... > > I know what you mean, but it's tricky because of the subject. Maybe a colon > after the "might perceive as"? > > > > I think this changes the meaning to one I don't want. But I'm not entirely > > > sure. In a way the two concepts "update of perception" and "update perception" > > > are different things. I think this can be argued either way. > > > > So, what can I say... > > How about: "Aargh! Nonono! The English language is completely horrible!"?
You should talk to some English-speaking person who learns Polish. It's hard to believe, but there are such people. (They could be sometimes seen in our TV - it's a real stunt!)
I prefer to fix C too, and I'm far from beeing the right person to do this (I don't care much about "unlogical" languages), but I like the style of your manual, and I think it's too good to leave small spots here.
I think, there is some time till tomorrow (or even leave something for another patch).
BTW, did I write about resending "yesterday"? This time saving really works...
Cheers, Jarek P. - 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/
| |