[PATCH 0/3] Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt edits

[PATCH 0/3] Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt edits

[Aaron Faanes]

Some minor proofreading changes in inotify.txt.

Aaron Faanes (3):
  Documentation: remove some spurious spaces in inotify.txt
  Documentation: Correct a couple missing words in inotify.txt
  Documentation: Reword example about inotify's fd-per-instance design

 Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt |    8 ++++----
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.4.4

[PATCH 1/3] Documentation: remove some spurious spaces in inotify.txt

[Aaron Faanes]

Signed-off-by: Aaron Faanes <dafrito@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
index 59a919f..f00c435 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
@@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed,
    scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem
    the right interface.  It is too heavy.
 
-   Additionally, it _is_ possible to  more than one instance  and
+   Additionally, it _is_ possible to more than one instance and
    juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd.  There
    need not be a one-fd-per-process mapping; it is one-fd-per-queue and a
    process can easily want more than one queue.
-- 
1.7.4.4

Re: [PATCH 1/3] Documentation: remove some spurious spaces in inotify.txt

[Randy Dunlap]

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 19:35:02 -0500 Aaron Faanes wrote:

> Signed-off-by: Aaron Faanes <dafrito@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
> index 59a919f..f00c435 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
> @@ -250,7 +250,7 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed,
>     scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem
>     the right interface.  It is too heavy.
>  
> -   Additionally, it _is_ possible to  more than one instance  and
> +   Additionally, it _is_ possible to more than one instance and

Isn't there at least one word missing here?

>     juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd.  There
>     need not be a one-fd-per-process mapping; it is one-fd-per-queue and a
>     process can easily want more than one queue.
> -- 


---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

[PATCH 2/3] Documentation: Correct a couple missing words in inotify.txt

[Aaron Faanes]

Signed-off-by: Aaron Faanes <dafrito@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
index f00c435..8d8cba1 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
@@ -248,9 +248,9 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed,
 
    When you talk about designing a file change notification system that
    scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem
-   the right interface.  It is too heavy.
+   to be the right interface.  It is too heavy.
 
-   Additionally, it _is_ possible to more than one instance and
+   Additionally, it _is_ possible to have more than one instance and
    juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd.  There
    need not be a one-fd-per-process mapping; it is one-fd-per-queue and a
    process can easily want more than one queue.
-- 
1.7.4.4

Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation: Correct a couple missing words in inotify.txt

[Randy Dunlap]

On Sun, 24 Apr 2011 19:35:03 -0500 Aaron Faanes wrote:

> Signed-off-by: Aaron Faanes <dafrito@gmail.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
> index f00c435..8d8cba1 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
> @@ -248,9 +248,9 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed,
>  
>     When you talk about designing a file change notification system that
>     scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem
> -   the right interface.  It is too heavy.
> +   to be the right interface.  It is too heavy.

either way is OK.

>  
> -   Additionally, it _is_ possible to more than one instance and
> +   Additionally, it _is_ possible to have more than one instance and

OK, there is the missing word.

>     juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd.  There
>     need not be a one-fd-per-process mapping; it is one-fd-per-queue and a
>     process can easily want more than one queue.
> -- 


---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

[PATCH 3/3] Documentation: Reword example about inotify's fd-per-instance design

[Aaron Faanes]

Made the final example read more clearly by splitting it into a
couple more sentences.

Signed-off-by: Aaron Faanes <dafrito@gmail.com>
---
 Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt |    6 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
index 8d8cba1..fbb50ad 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/inotify.txt
@@ -246,9 +246,9 @@ A: An fd-per-watch quickly consumes more file descriptors than are allowed,
 
    - 1024 is still too low.  ;-)
 
-   When you talk about designing a file change notification system that
-   scales to 1000s of directories, juggling 1000s of fd's just does not seem
-   to be the right interface.  It is too heavy.
+   For example, consider the design of a file change notification system that
+   scales to 1000s of directories.  Juggling 1000s of fd's in this case is just
+   not the right interface.  It is too heavy.
 
    Additionally, it _is_ possible to have more than one instance and
    juggle more than one queue and thus more than one associated fd.  There
-- 
1.7.4.4