On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 01:59:36PM +0200, Luca Abeni wrote: > Hi all, > > here is the promised update for Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt. > I send it as an RFC because of the following doubts: > 1) I split the patches trying to isolate related changes. So, > - the first patch fixes 2 typos that I noticed when updating the > documentation > - the second patch is based on Zhiqiang Zhang's patch and fixes some > inconsistencies in the symbols used for period and execution times > - the third patch adds a small discussion about admission tests for EDF on > single processor systems > - the fourth patch discusses the multi-processor case, adding some missing > references > I am not sure if this split is ok, or if I should do something different > (should I put all of the changes in a single patch?) This is indeed the preferred way. > 2) The second patch is partly by me and partly by Zhiqiang Zhang. I do not > know how to preserve Zhiqiang Zhang's authorship, so I added "Based on a > patch by Zhiqiang Zhang" in the changelog. But I am not sure if this is > the correct thing to do (maybe I should split this in 2 different patches?) This is not uncommon practise and works for me. > 3) I re-read the added text multiple times, and it looks ok to me... But I am > not a native speaker, so it might contain English errors or sentences that > are not clear enough I send the one comment I had in reply to the relevant email. Other than that it looked good to me so I've queued these patches. Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
