Hi, On 04/12/2015 11:47 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@xxxxxxxx> wrote:Hi all, here is an update for Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt. Respect to the RFC I sent few days ago, I: 1) Split the patches in a better way, (so that, for example, Zhiqiang Zhang's authorship is preserved) 2) Tried to address all the comments I received on the RFC 3) Added another patch, to split Section 3 in various subsections. I think it is more readable in this way. Anyway, this is the last patch, so it can easily be skipped if people do not like it. I also split in a separate patch the discussion about the relationship between tasks' parameters and SCHED_DEADLINE parameters. This is (I think) the only part of the patchset that has not been previously discussed; I decided to isolate it in its own patch so that other patches can be applied anyway.Note that your Signed-off-by lines are missing.
Ops... I knew I was doing something wrong...
I also noticed the following inconsistency: 'utilization' (and variants) is spelled in two variants in the text: 'utilization' and 'utilisation'. I'd strongly suggest using 'utilization' et al (american spelling), because that's how it's spelled in most of the kernel source.
Sorry about that... I have ispell configured to use the british dictionary as a default. I think this inconsistency already existed before my patches... So, what should I do? Should I resend the patchset, adding a patch to convert from british to american spelling before my new changes? Or can the patches be committed as they are now, and then I send a follow-up patch to convert the spelling? In any case, I'll send the new version of the patchset or the follow-up patch (depending on what is the preferred thing) later this week, on Thursday or on Friday (right now I am overloaded with work-related stuff). Thanks, Luca -- 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
