Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/8] documentation: Record RCU requirements

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 04:07:19PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 03:50:19PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > This commit adds RCU requirements as published in a 2015 LWN series.
> > Bringing these requirements in-tree allows them to be updated as changes
> > are discovered.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  .../RCU/Design/Requirements/2013-08-is-it-dead.png |  Bin 0 -> 100825 bytes
> >  .../Design/Requirements/GPpartitionReaders1.svg    |  374 +++
> >  .../RCU/Design/Requirements/RCUApplicability.svg   |  237 ++
> >  .../Design/Requirements/ReadersPartitionGP1.svg    |  639 +++++
> >  .../RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html      | 2799 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >  .../RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx     | 2643 ++++++++++++++++++
> >  Documentation/RCU/Design/htmlqqz.sh                |  108 +
> >  7 files changed, 6800 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/2013-08-is-it-dead.png
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/GPpartitionReaders1.svg
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/RCUApplicability.svg
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/ReadersPartitionGP1.svg
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html
> >  create mode 100644 Documentation/RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx
> 
> If Requirements.html is machine-generated and shouldn't be hand-edited,
> and it can be generated without any special tools, then I don't think it
> should be committed in the tree; I'd suggest putting it in .gitignore
> and generating it from one of the various "make docs" invocations.

I considered doing that, but then decided that it is nice for people to
be able train their browser directly on the file without having to know
what scripts to run.

Hmmm...  I suppose I could construct a Makefile that dealt with that
though...  I will give this some thought, and if it looks good, I will
add the Makefiles and "git rm" the .htmlx files.

> Alternatively, if you want to make sure a usable version is in-tree, you
> could make the script reversible (easy enough to do if the compiled
> version includes some marker comments or similar), and then tell people
> to run it in reverse mode, edit, and run it in forward mode.  Then you
> don't need the .htmlx file at all. :)

Decades ago, back when I (against all evidence) believed I could
consistently avoid making stupid mistakes, you might have been able to
convince me that this was a good idea.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/