From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Developers <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Stephen Clark <sclark46@earthlink.net>,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: rw_lock lessons learned
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 12:01:16 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B227ADC.5010908@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AFBEC44.9030409@gmail.com>
William Allen Simpson wrote:
> In recent weeks, two different network projects erroneously
> strayed down the rw_lock path. Update the Documentation
> based upon comments by Eric Dumazet and Paul E. McKenney in
> those threads.
>
> Merged with editorial changes by Stephen Hemminger.
>
> Signed-off-by: William.Allen.Simpson@gmail.com
> Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
A month ago, I'd taken the final line "Ho humm.." of Linus'
response to mean he wasn't interested. But at the local
discussion yesterday, I'm told that's just a typical Linusism.
The thread diverged into discussion of another document entirely.
I'm not the person to update this document with any of the other
information about global locks and tasklists and such. But surely
somebody else could handle that in another patch.
Anybody have answers/updates to Linus's concerns about "pretty old
and bogus language"? Would folks be interested in the update?
Does anybody know which list(s) would be better for discussion?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-11 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-10 19:55 [PATCH resent] Documentation: rw_lock lessons learned William Allen Simpson
2009-11-10 21:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-11-11 2:06 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-11-11 17:08 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-11-11 17:37 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-11-12 11:06 ` [PATCH v2] " William Allen Simpson
2009-11-12 15:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-11-12 17:04 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-11-12 19:13 ` Stephen Clark
2009-11-12 23:00 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-11-13 8:59 ` Stefan Richter
2009-11-13 16:15 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-12-11 17:01 ` William Allen Simpson [this message]
2009-12-11 21:07 ` [PATCH v2] " Jarek Poplawski
2009-12-12 10:36 ` William Allen Simpson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4B227ADC.5010908@gmail.com \
--to=william.allen.simpson@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=sclark46@earthlink.net \
--cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).