On 4/17/23 21:01, SeongJae Park wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 18:53:24 +0100 Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 05:26:57PM +0000, SeongJae Park wrote:
>> > Hi Vlastimil,
>> >
>> > On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:05:40 +0200 Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> > > On 4/15/23 05:31, SeongJae Park wrote:
>> > > > The SLAB_TYPESAFE_BY_RCU example code snippet is having not tiny RCU
>> > >
>> > > Since "tiny RCU" means something quite specific in the RCU world, it can be
>> > > confusing to read it in this sense. We could say e.g. "... snippet uses a
>> > > single RCU read-side critical section for retries"?
>> >
>> > Looks much better, thank you for this suggestion!
>> >
>> > >
>> > > > read-side critical section. 'Documentation/RCU/rculist_nulls.rst' has
>> > > > similar example code snippet, and commit da82af04352b ("doc: Update and
>> > > > wordsmith rculist_nulls.rst") has broken it.
>> > >
>> > > "has broken it" has quite different meaning than "has broken it up" :) I
>> > > guess we could just add the "up", unless someone has an even better wording.
>> >
>> > Good point, thank you for your suggestion!
>> >
>> > I will apply above suggestion on the next spin.
>>
>> For the last one, perhaps changing the tense would have more clarity:
>>
>> similar example code snippet, and commit da82af04352b ("doc: Update and
>> wordsmith rculist_nulls.rst") broke it up.
>
> Thank you for this suggestion, Matthew! Will send a new version.
It's ok, I can just use that when picking the patches up without a new resend.
> Thanks,
> SJ
