From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755310Ab1EBI1T (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2011 04:27:19 -0400 Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.139]:33238 "EHLO e9.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751765Ab1EBI1S (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 May 2011 04:27:18 -0400 Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 01:27:11 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Josh Triplett Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com, patches@linaro.org, "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 11/86] rcu: Add boosting to TREE_PREEMPT_RCU tracing Message-ID: <20110502082711.GW2297@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20110501132142.GA25494@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1304256126-26015-11-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20110501155225.GF14829@feather> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110501155225.GF14829@feather> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 08:52:25AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 06:20:51AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > From: Paul E. McKenney > > > > Includes total number of tasks boosted, number boosted on behalf of each > > of normal and expedited grace periods, and statistics on attempts to > > initiate boosting that failed for various reasons. > > In this patch series, you have several cases where you improve the trace > output in one patch, and then update the documentation in a subsequent > patch. You might consider doing both in the same patch, so that at each > step the documentation matches the kernel. The reason I do the documentation second is that it allows me to copy the exact output from a test run, which has the nice side-effect of making sure that I really am getting the documentation correct. Or at least of reducing the probability of getting it wrong... ;-) Thanx, Paul