Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Aug 2008 11:28:01 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH, RFC, tip/core/rcu] scalable classic RCU implementation |
| |
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 05:26:43PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2008-08-25 at 08:16 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > 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!!!) > > But but but, you got the cases the wrong way around.. ;-)
Good point...
#ifdef READER_LIKES_DOCUMENTATION_URLS_IN_COMMENTS * 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) #else * Documentation/RCU #endif
Of course, the C preprocessor would just remove the whole comment anyway, but hopefully it is the thought that counts. ;-)
> > 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. ;-) > > I guess we could do the 'this is how the concept works and can be used > like so and so' documentation in Documentation/
Documentation/RCU/whatisRCU.txt does in fact contain the three URLs listed above. And there is always Documentation/RCU/RTFP.txt for people wanting the full effect.
> And the stuff that says 'this code does like so and so, because blah' > should stay near the code. > > And in any case of doubt - stay near the code :-) > > I always view Documentation/ as end user stuff (be that a kernel > programmer that needs to learn a new API, or userland folks or people > wanting to know what a certain feature is about).
I confess to erring on the side of spamming all channels. Then again, I am a serial junk-mailer, so perhaps this is just me.
Thanx, Paul
| |