On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 10:06:22PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> 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.
Good point! I am guessing that these predated \OriginallyPublished{}, and
that I didn't get around to fixing them properly. I have now fixed them.
> * Position of Quick Quiz 9.44 looks a little premature. SRCU is mentioned
> just after the Quick Quiz.
Good catch, moved.
> * 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.
Now it is "Section~\ref{sec:defer:RCU Usage}", good eyes!
> * 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.
You know, that is strangely appropriate, now that you mention it! ;-)
But how about the following?
Nevertheless, you will need a thorough understanding of Chapters
2, 3, 4, and 6, as well as the previous portions of Chapter 9 for
even these toy RCU implementations to be easily understandable.
> * Also in the introduction of Section 9.5.5, Section 9.5.5.2 is not mentioned.
Fixed! Now "Section 9.5.5.2 through 9.5.5.9".
> * (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.)
I fixed it with your Reported-by.
And here is the Youtube video corresponding to that particular typo:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Diu2N8TGKA
> * (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.
Odd. Those were there in the initial git commit.
I am removing the $\dagger$ commands and thus letting them be normal
paragraphs.
> 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.
They were all reasonably easy, so might as well do them now. Famous
last words. ;-)
I commited and pushed them all.
Thanx, Paul
--
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
