Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:16:45 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH, RFC, tip/core/rcu] scalable classic RCU implementation |
| |
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 12:34:56PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2008-08-22 at 16:29 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > > @@ -26,8 +27,10 @@ > > > * http://lse.sourceforge.net/locking/rclock_OLS.2001.05.01c.sc.pdf (OLS2001) > > > * > > > * For detailed explanation of Read-Copy Update mechanism see - > > > - * Documentation/RCU > > > - * > > > + * Documentation/RCU > > > + * http://lwn.net/Articles/262464/ (What is RCU, Fundamentally?) > > > + * http://lwn.net/Articles/263130/ (What is RCU's Usage?) > > > + * http://lwn.net/Articles/264090/ (What is RCU's API? + references) > > > */ > > > > Why put these references here rather than in Documentation/RCU? It > > seems easier to keep documentation up to date in one place. If you > > think these represent a good "getting started" set of documents, how > > about a Documentation/RCU/ReadTheseFirst with links to them, or how > > about linking to them from whatisRCU.txt? > > I actually like in code comments and 'documentation' more than > Documentation/ stuff. Mostly because Documentation/ is: > - far away from the code > - therefore, more easily bitrotted > - and easily forgotten
I know!!!
#ifdef JOSH_TRIPLETT * Documentation/RCU * http://lwn.net/Articles/262464/ (What is RCU, Fundamentally?) * http://lwn.net/Articles/263130/ (What is RCU's Usage?) * http://lwn.net/Articles/264090/ (What is RCU's API? + references) #elif PETER_ZIJLSTRA * Documentation/RCU #endif
(Sorry, couldn't resist!!!)
Seriously, I know where all the documentation is, as I wrote most of it. These comments are for you guys. So, any thoughts on how I should resolve this? My default is, as always, a coin flip. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
| |