Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765770AbXEVNje (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 09:39:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757312AbXEVNj1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 09:39:27 -0400 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.246]:12013 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757042AbXEVNj0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2007 09:39:26 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=XR1C6/JoXENdDCiP7DrypFVx1+NgQUWKMdO8lkrIT8GdTe+9BYN/dGEleRDvtWlFl4CJGt+u0Icy/0bQnKOdH8AFguHWKb/wX/ccXlUg2eziBe221cT956Qc1JhK6khIQcDmPd+8B/jZA87O9zELLI8uET19DK8ZRpMZ0GeqISc= Message-ID: <7b69d1470705220639w767eda81g5d4988ef09d77316@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 08:39:25 -0500 From: "Scott Preece" To: "Jarek Poplawski" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/memory-barriers.txt: various fixes Cc: "David Howells" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Robert P. J. Day" In-Reply-To: <20070521151953.GC4050@ff.dom.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070521135048.GB4050@ff.dom.local> <20070521094224.GB1695@ff.dom.local> <7846.1179749390@redhat.com> <12203.1179756727@redhat.com> <20070521151953.GC4050@ff.dom.local> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1370 Lines: 31 On 5/21/07, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 03:12:07PM +0100, David Howells wrote: > > Jarek Poplawski wrote: > > > > > > > - load will be directed), a data dependency barrier would be required to > > > > > + load will be directed), the data dependency barrier would be required to > > > > > > > > I think that should be "a". > > > > > > I could only guess (it's a magic to me) - so, if it doesn't matter > > > "A data ..." begins this paragraph... > > > > I see what you mean. I see it as "a data dependency barrier ..." though. That > > may be because I wrote the doc, however. I wonder if "data dependency" should > > be hyphenated to make it clearer. What do you think? > > Better don't ask. Now I'm far less decided, than yesterday. --- "data-dependency barrier" would be better, assuming you mean a barrier enforcing a data dependency. If you say "data dependency barrier" you could also mean a "dependency barrier" implemented as a piece of data, for instance, like a flag value in a data stream that forces synchronization with another data stream. scott - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/