Re: [RFC 0/4] SCHED_DEADLINE documentation update

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Wed Apr 08 2015 - 10:44:36 EST

On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 01:59:36PM +0200, Luca Abeni wrote:
> Hi all,
> here is the promised update for Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt.
> I send it as an RFC because of the following doubts:
> 1) I split the patches trying to isolate related changes. So,
> - the first patch fixes 2 typos that I noticed when updating the
> documentation
> - the second patch is based on Zhiqiang Zhang's patch and fixes some
> inconsistencies in the symbols used for period and execution times
> - the third patch adds a small discussion about admission tests for EDF on
> single processor systems
> - the fourth patch discusses the multi-processor case, adding some missing
> references
> I am not sure if this split is ok, or if I should do something different
> (should I put all of the changes in a single patch?)

This is indeed the preferred way.

> 2) The second patch is partly by me and partly by Zhiqiang Zhang. I do not
> know how to preserve Zhiqiang Zhang's authorship, so I added "Based on a
> patch by Zhiqiang Zhang" in the changelog. But I am not sure if this is
> the correct thing to do (maybe I should split this in 2 different patches?)

This is not uncommon practise and works for me.

> 3) I re-read the added text multiple times, and it looks ok to me... But I am
> not a native speaker, so it might contain English errors or sentences that
> are not clear enough

I send the one comment I had in reply to the relevant email.

Other than that it looked good to me so I've queued these patches.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at