From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759030AbYEFIHR (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 04:07:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753500AbYEFIG6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 04:06:58 -0400 Received: from E23SMTP04.au.ibm.com ([202.81.18.173]:36914 "EHLO e23smtp04.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750782AbYEFIGz (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 04:06:55 -0400 Message-ID: <48200FDF.7070408@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 13:29:27 +0530 From: Balbir Singh Reply-To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Organization: IBM User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: linux-mm@kvack.org, skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, yamamoto@valinux.co.jp, menage@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, xemul@openvz.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com Subject: Re: [-mm][PATCH 4/4] Add rlimit controller documentation References: <20080503213726.3140.68845.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080503213825.3140.4328.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080505153509.da667caf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <481FEF28.1000502@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080505225434.3f81828b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080505225434.3f81828b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 06 May 2008 11:09:52 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > >>> Ho hum, I had to do rather a lot of guesswork here to try to understand >>> your proposed overall design for this feature. I'd prefer to hear about >>> your design via more direct means. >> Do you have any suggestions on how to do that better. Would you like >> documentation to be the first patch in the series? I had sent out two RFC's >> earlier and got comments and feedback from several people. >> > > I do like to see the overall what-i-am-setting-out-to-do description in > there somewhere - sometimes a Docuemtation/ file is appropriate, other > times do it via changelog. > I think having documentation upfront does make sense in that case. I'll also try and make the changelogs more verbose. I usually try to point to the previous discussions in the introduction patch. > But the first part of the review is reviewing whatever it is which you set > out to achieve. Once that's understood and sounds like a good idea then we > can start looking at how you did it. > > Yes, I agree. -- Warm Regards, Balbir Singh Linux Technology Center IBM, ISTL