Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Sat, 29 Dec 2018 18:55:02 +0100 | From | Willy Tarreau <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/3] rcutorture/nolibc: add a bit of documentation to explain how to use nolibc |
| |
Hi Randy,
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 08:50:09AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > This is a good summary IMO. Thanks. > And it's in good shape -- doesn't *require* any fixes. > But if you do make any changes to it, here are a few suggestions. :)
Thanks very much.
> > + * This file is designed to be used as a libc alternative for minimal programs > > + * with very limited requirements. It consists of a small number of syscall and > > + * types definitions, and the minimal startup code needed to call main(). > > type
Funny, I hesitated on this one and "fixed" it :-)
> > + * All syscalls are declared as static functions so that they can be optimized > > + * away by the compiler when not used. > > + * > > + * Syscalls are split between 3 levels : > > Instead of "between", use either "among" or "into". and then "levels:".
Will do, thanks.
> > + * - the lower level is the arch-specific syscall() definition, consisting in > > + * assembly code in compound expressions. These ones are called > > Apparently "these ones" is acceptable in UK English, not so in US English.
Oh I didn't know, I've used it quite a bit in the last decades, thinking it was a valid plural for "this one". It seems like I should use "These" instead, feel free to suggest otherwise.
> I don't like it, but we do accept UK English here. :)
I prefer to be corrected and to avoid using bad English, whether it's US or UK, as much as I hate to make mistakes in French.
> > + * Some stdint-like integer types are defined. These ones are valid on all > > These are valid on all
OK, makes sense according to the point above.
> ciao. thanks.
I'm applying the changes right now to my local tree and will respin a version. Thank you!
Willy
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |