Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sun, 28 Oct 2018 10:29:18 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] rcu: doc: update example about stale data
Reply-To: paulmck@linux.ibm.com
References: <20181028021653.155513-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
 <CAEXW_YTCJS9Yxt4J=nbF+Omdon_4Li2BUiVzALGX246fMA9J2Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEXW_YTCJS9Yxt4J=nbF+Omdon_4Li2BUiVzALGX246fMA9J2Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Message-Id: <20181028172918.GO4170@linux.ibm.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 09:44:31PM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Joel Fernandes (Google)
> <joel@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> > The RCU example for 'rejecting stale data' on system-call auditting
> > stops iterating through the rules if a deleted one is found. It makes
> > more sense to continue looking at other rules once a deleted one is
> > rejected. Although the original example is fine, this makes it more
> > meaningful.
> 
> Sorry, I messed up the patch title, it is supposed to be 'doc: rcu:
> ...'. I can resend it if you want.

Hmmm...  There doesn't seem to be any consistent standard for documentation
patches.  I see "Documentation: networking:", "docs:", "doc:" (which is
what I normally use), "doc:doc-guide:", "Documentation/process:",
"doc/devicetree:", "media: doc:", and who knows what all else.

Including "Documentation" seems excessive.  I guess I am OK with
"doc: rcu:", but either just plain "doc:" or "doc/rcu:" would be fine
with me as well.

							Thanx, Paul