I've noticed that getting documentation patches merged seems to be a
slower and more uncertain process than it was a while back. So I
figured I'd try to be one of the cool folks with their own git tree and
see if that works better. Linus, if you agree, could you please pull:
git://git.lwn.net/linux-2.6.git docs
To get the following:
Jonathan Corbet (3):
Add the seq_file documentation
Fill out information on patch tags in SubmittingPatches
Add a comment discouraging use of in_atomic()
Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 54 ++++++-
Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX | 2 +
Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt | 283 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/hardirq.h | 8 +
4 files changed, 344 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
These changes are (1) an updated version of the seq_file document first
posted in 2003, (2) the much-reviewed patch tags documentation, and
(3) a comment warning developers that in_atomic() doesn't mean what they
think it means. No code changes.
If this works out, and nobody objects, I'll try to run this tree into
the future as a collection point for documentation patches which don't
have a more obvious tree to travel through.
Thanks,
jon
On Friday 2008-03-28 19:20, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> git://git.lwn.net/linux-2.6.git docs
$ git remote add doc git://git.lwn.net/linux-2.6.git
$ git-fetch doc
fatal: Unable to look up git.lwn.net (port 9418) (Name or service not known)
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>
> git://git.lwn.net/linux-2.6.git docs
That seems to be a pretty recent DNS entry that hasn't percolated out yet.
I get "git.lwn.net: NXDOMAIN" to my nslookup query (and git itself
obviously says "Name or service not known").
I decided to try if it was the same machine as lwn.net, but it isn't.
So you'll need to resend this when it has percolated or send me an IP
address ;)
Linus
Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote:
> That seems to be a pretty recent DNS entry that hasn't percolated out yet.
> I get "git.lwn.net: NXDOMAIN" to my nslookup query (and git itself
> obviously says "Name or service not known").
>
> So you'll need to resend this when it has percolated or send me an IP
> address ;)
Hmph. It worked from the machines *I* tried it on...:(
Until the name gets out, pulling:
git://vena.lwn.net/linux-2.6.git docs
will work. That name has been out there for eight years or so, should
have percolated by now...
Sorry for the trouble,
jon
On Friday 2008-03-28 19:20, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>commit 9756ccfda31b4c4544aa010aacf71b6672d668e8
>Date: Fri Mar 28 11:19:56 2008 -0600
>
> Add the seq_file documentation
patch on top:
- add const qualifiers
- remove void* casts
- use proper specifier (%Ld is not valid)
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt b/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
index 92975ee..cc6cdb9 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
@@ -107,8 +107,8 @@ complete. Here's the example version:
static void *ct_seq_next(struct seq_file *s, void *v, loff_t *pos)
{
- loff_t *spos = (loff_t *) v;
- *pos = ++(*spos);
+ loff_t *spos = v;
+ *pos = ++*spos;
return spos;
}
@@ -127,8 +127,8 @@ something goes wrong. The example module's show() function is:
static int ct_seq_show(struct seq_file *s, void *v)
{
- loff_t *spos = (loff_t *) v;
- seq_printf(s, "%Ld\n", *spos);
+ loff_t *spos = v;
+ seq_printf(s, "%lld\n", (long long)*spos);
return 0;
}
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ We will look at seq_printf() in a moment. But first, the definition of the
seq_file iterator is finished by creating a seq_operations structure with
the four functions we have just defined:
- static struct seq_operations ct_seq_ops = {
+ static const struct seq_operations ct_seq_ops = {
.start = ct_seq_start,
.next = ct_seq_next,
.stop = ct_seq_stop,
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ line, as in the example module:
static int ct_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
{
return seq_open(file, &ct_seq_ops);
- };
+ }
Here, the call to seq_open() takes the seq_operations structure we created
before, and gets set up to iterate through the virtual file.
@@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ The other operations of interest - read(), llseek(), and release() - are
all implemented by the seq_file code itself. So a virtual file's
file_operations structure will look like:
- static struct file_operations ct_file_ops = {
+ static const struct file_operations ct_file_ops = {
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
.open = ct_open,
.read = seq_read,
Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]> wrote:
> patch on top:
>
> - add const qualifiers
> - remove void* casts
> - use proper specifier (%Ld is not valid)
Looks good, I applied it.
Thanks,
jon
On Fri, Mar 28, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]> wrote:
> I've noticed that getting documentation patches merged seems to be a
> slower and more uncertain process than it was a while back. So I
> figured I'd try to be one of the cool folks with their own git tree and
> see if that works better. Linus, if you agree, could you please pull:
A small patch for the highres timers documentation:
Signed-off-by: Will newton <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/hrtimers/highres.txt | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/hrtimers/highres.txt
b/Documentation/hrtimers/highres.txt
index ce0e9a9..a73ecf5 100644
--- a/Documentation/hrtimers/highres.txt
+++ b/Documentation/hrtimers/highres.txt
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ System-level global event devices are used for the
Linux periodic tick. Per-CPU
event devices are used to provide local CPU functionality such as process
accounting, profiling, and high resolution timers.
-The management layer assignes one or more of the folliwing functions to a clock
+The management layer assigns one or more of the following functions to a clock
event device:
- system global periodic tick (jiffies update)
- cpu local update_process_times
--
1.5.4.3
Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> I've noticed that getting documentation patches merged seems to be a
> slower and more uncertain process than it was a while back. So I
> figured I'd try to be one of the cool folks with their own git tree and
> see if that works better. Linus, if you agree, could you please pull:
A lot of the time it's just a matter of the "merge window" for
non-critical patches. OTOH, doc patches could be merged at just about
any time IMO.
> git://git.lwn.net/linux-2.6.git docs
>
> To get the following:
>
> Jonathan Corbet (3):
> Add the seq_file documentation
> Fill out information on patch tags in SubmittingPatches
> Add a comment discouraging use of in_atomic()
>
> Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 54 ++++++-
> Documentation/filesystems/00-INDEX | 2 +
> Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt | 283 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/hardirq.h | 8 +
> 4 files changed, 344 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
>
> These changes are (1) an updated version of the seq_file document first
> posted in 2003, (2) the much-reviewed patch tags documentation, and
> (3) a comment warning developers that in_atomic() doesn't mean what they
> think it means. No code changes.
>
> If this works out, and nobody objects, I'll try to run this tree into
> the future as a collection point for documentation patches which don't
> have a more obvious tree to travel through.
Getting doc patches merged can be slow sometimes (slower than needed),
but I'm still having success at it.
--
~Randy
Jan Engelhardt пишет:
>
> On Friday 2008-03-28 19:20, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> commit 9756ccfda31b4c4544aa010aacf71b6672d668e8
>> Date: Fri Mar 28 11:19:56 2008 -0600
>>
>> Add the seq_file documentation
>
> patch on top:
>
> - add const qualifiers
> - remove void* casts
> - use proper specifier (%Ld is not valid)
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
> b/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
> index 92975ee..cc6cdb9 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt
> @@ -107,8 +107,8 @@ complete. Here's the example version:
>
> static void *ct_seq_next(struct seq_file *s, void *v, loff_t *pos)
> {
> - loff_t *spos = (loff_t *) v;
> - *pos = ++(*spos);
> + loff_t *spos = v;
> + *pos = ++*spos;
Excuse me, what's the point in this change and the next one? IMO, removing
the explicit type cast makes the code less obvious (AFAICT, this is a trendy
word in LKML these days). Relying upon operator priorities instead of explicit
operator grouping using parentheses can confuse people, too. Imagine a
person looking at these lines: after the change, he or she will need to check
the variable v type in the argument list, and consult the table of operator
priorities in C if the person is in doubt about what the code does.
Just my two cents...
Dmitri
> return spos;
> }
>
> @@ -127,8 +127,8 @@ something goes wrong. The example module's show()
> function is:
>
> static int ct_seq_show(struct seq_file *s, void *v)
> {
> - loff_t *spos = (loff_t *) v;
> - seq_printf(s, "%Ld\n", *spos);
> + loff_t *spos = v;
> + seq_printf(s, "%lld\n", (long long)*spos);
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ We will look at seq_printf() in a moment. But first,
> the definition of the
> seq_file iterator is finished by creating a seq_operations structure with
> the four functions we have just defined:
>
> - static struct seq_operations ct_seq_ops = {
> + static const struct seq_operations ct_seq_ops = {
> .start = ct_seq_start,
> .next = ct_seq_next,
> .stop = ct_seq_stop,
> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ line, as in the example module:
> static int ct_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> {
> return seq_open(file, &ct_seq_ops);
> - };
> + }
>
> Here, the call to seq_open() takes the seq_operations structure we created
> before, and gets set up to iterate through the virtual file.
> @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ The other operations of interest - read(), llseek(),
> and release() - are
> all implemented by the seq_file code itself. So a virtual file's
> file_operations structure will look like:
>
> - static struct file_operations ct_file_ops = {
> + static const struct file_operations ct_file_ops = {
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> .open = ct_open,
> .read = seq_read,
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>