> Items for consideration would be: > > - if this stuff is good, shouldn't other code be using it? If so, is > this new infrastructure in the correct place? > > - if, otoh, this infrastructure is _not_ suitable for other code, well, > what was wrong with it? > > - if the requirement is good, perhaps alternative implementations should > be explored (dunno what). Well, we could just rewrite the whole kernel in Web and judge all future patches on how literate they are... Seriously, though, even if the (small) infrastructure is not going to take over the driver tree anytime soon, it's hard to imagine why we would not want to incorporate this sort of documentation. It's good stuff, something which can really help people get a sense for how this whole virtualization thing works. And it makes the code fun to read. jon P.S. I am currently considering a no-limericks policy for the LWN quote of the week. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
