Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 May 2007 08:39:25 -0500 | From | "Scott Preece" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: various fixes |
| |
On 5/21/07, Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@o2.pl> wrote: > 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. ---
"data-dependency barrier" would be better, assuming you mean a barrier enforcing a data dependency. If you say "data dependency barrier" you could also mean a "dependency barrier" implemented as a piece of data, for instance, like a flag value in a data stream that forces synchronization with another data stream.
scott - 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/
| |