Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1523110 > unrolled thread

[PATCH] docs/completion.txt: drop dangling reference to completions-design.txt

Started byBrian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
First post2016-11-15 23:50 +0100
Last post2016-11-17 00:30 +0100
Articles 2 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  [PATCH] docs/completion.txt: drop dangling reference to  completions-design.txt Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> - 2016-11-15 23:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] docs/completion.txt: drop dangling reference to  completions-design.txt Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> - 2016-11-17 00:30 +0100

#1523110 — [PATCH] docs/completion.txt: drop dangling reference to completions-design.txt

FromBrian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Date2016-11-15 23:50 +0100
Subject[PATCH] docs/completion.txt: drop dangling reference to completions-design.txt
Message-ID<sDUIa-2A0-21@gated-at.bofh.it>
Per the original author, the proposed document was never deemed
necessary, and the important bits got merged into completion.txt. Let's
just stop confusing readers by pointing at a nonexistent doc.

Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
---

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:11:26AM +0000, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:50:01PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > References in the introduced completion.txt doc have pointed lost souls
> > at an elusive completion-design.txt:
> > 
> >   "for details on completion design and implementation see
> >   completions-design.txt"
[...]
> If I remember correctly it was Jonathan Corbet that suggested to merge the
> two and atleast the usage part got merged in the current completion.txt 
> The path descriptions were not included as it was not clear how long such
> a path documentation would actually hold - so that was deliberately dropped
> The design goals/rational was more or less lost or not seen as relevant here
> as were the references/history and RT notes. As far as I remember it was a
> deliberate decision to drop these parts as they were not seen to be necessary.
> 
> Those missing bits could be merged into the current completion.txt I do not
> think it makes much sense to have it in a seperate file.

I'm not super interested in the missing bits -- just in de-obfuscating
the doc. How about this?

 Documentation/scheduler/completion.txt | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/scheduler/completion.txt b/Documentation/scheduler/completion.txt
index 2622bc7a188b..656cf803c006 100644
--- a/Documentation/scheduler/completion.txt
+++ b/Documentation/scheduler/completion.txt
@@ -25,8 +25,7 @@ struct completion that tells the waiting threads of execution if they
 can continue safely.
 
 As completions are scheduling related, the code is found in
-kernel/sched/completion.c - for details on completion design and
-implementation see completions-design.txt
+kernel/sched/completion.c.
 
 
 Usage:
-- 
2.8.0.rc3.226.g39d4020

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1523965

FromJonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Date2016-11-17 00:30 +0100
Message-ID<sEhOp-10r-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1523110
On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 14:42:14 -0800
Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> wrote:

> Per the original author, the proposed document was never deemed
> necessary, and the important bits got merged into completion.txt. Let's
> just stop confusing readers by pointing at a nonexistent doc.

Makes sense, applied.

Thanks,

jon

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web