Hi Paul,
There are still several issues regarding Chapter 9 I want to feedback.
I'm afraid most of them are beyond my ability to submit as patches.
* At the beginning of Section 9.5.2, there is a credit of the form
"Authors: ...".
But there is \OriginallyPublished{} command just above the credit.
I'm wondering if the credit in the text is necessary.
There is a similar credit at the beginning of Section 14.2, but there is
no \OriginallyPublished{} command there. This section seems to have been
written for perfbook. If this is the case, for a consistent look, it would
be better if the credit is moved to Appendix F.1.
* Position of Quick Quiz 9.44 looks a little premature. SRCU is mentioned
just after the Quick Quiz.
* The 2nd sentence of Section 9.5.4.4 ends as "... in the companion article."
This seems like a vestige of its origin in LWN. Should be fixed to match
the context.
* In the introduction of Section 9.5.5, understanding of the whole Chapter 9
is listed in the prerequisite for the "toy" implementation. I suppose
recursion is not intended here.
* Also in the introduction of Section 9.5.5, Section 9.5.5.2 is not mentioned.
* (Typo) In the 2nd paragraph of Section 9.7, there is a redundant "can" in
"... so that updates can can operate locally, ...".
(Yes, I can submit the fix of this one as a patch. If you want me to do so,
please let me know.)
* (Apart from Chapter 9) In Section 14.2.10.1, there are four instances of
$\dagger$ for introducing notes. I'm wondering if they can be converted
to footnotes. I'm not sure where they should be placed in the text, though.
I said earlier there were a few issues, but in the end there are a quite a few.
I don't mind if some (or all) of them be taken care of later after the upcoming
release.
Thanks, Akira
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe perfbook" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
