On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 08:21:15AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: > In 2c layout, Table E.3 goes to the next page of Listing E.3. > This is partly due to the table* environment, but as both of them > are floating, there is no sure way for them to be on the same page. > > Embed the listing at the bottom of the table so that they end up > in the same page and adjust the wording in the text. > > For 2c layout, using the table* environment causes the snippet to > look unnecessarily wide. Instead, shrink the table by using the > \tcresizewidth macro and use the normal table environment. > > Suggested-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> > Link: https://www.spinics.net/lists/perfbook/msg04070.html > Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Paul, > > In 2c layout, the table might become too small. > Does it look acceptable? Definitely a great improvment, thank you! Queued and pushed. Thanx, Paul > Thanks, Akira > -- > defer/rcuapi.tex | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/defer/rcuapi.tex b/defer/rcuapi.tex > index eea7259776d1..34791918588d 100644 > --- a/defer/rcuapi.tex > +++ b/defer/rcuapi.tex > @@ -337,40 +337,15 @@ The \apik{rcu_barrier()} primitive does this job. > critical sections to complete, \co{rcu_barrier()} instead waits > for callbacks from prior calls to \co{call_rcu()} to be invoked. > > -\begin{listing} > -\begin{fcvlabel}[ln:defer:synchonize-rcu vs rcu-barrier] > -\begin{VerbatimL}[commandchars=\\\@\$] > - do_something_1(); \lnlbl@ds1$ > - rcu_read_lock(); \lnlbl@rrl$ > - do_something_2(); \lnlbl@ds2$ > - call_rcu(&p->rh, f); \lnlbl@cr$ > - do_something_3(); \lnlbl@ds3$ > - rcu_read_unlock(); \lnlbl@rrul$ > - do_something_4(); \lnlbl@ds4$ > - // f(&p->rh) invoked \lnlbl@cb$ > - do_something_5(); \lnlbl@ds5$ > -\end{VerbatimL} > -\end{fcvlabel} > -\caption{\tco{synchronize_rcu()} vs. \tco{rcu_barrier()}} > -\label{lst:defer:synchronize-rcu vs. rcu-barrier} > -\end{listing} > - > - This distinction is illustrated by > - \cref{lst:defer:synchronize-rcu vs. rcu-barrier}, which > - shows code being executed by a given CPU\@. > - For simplicity, assume that no other CPU is executing > - \co{rcu_read_lock()}, \co{rcu_read_unlock()}, or > - \co{call_rcu()}. > - > - > -\begin{table*} > +\begin{table} > \renewcommand*{\arraystretch}{1.2} > \centering > \small > +\tcresizewidth{ > \begin{fcvref}[ln:defer:synchonize-rcu vs rcu-barrier] > \begin{tabular}{lll} > \toprule > - & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Must Wait Until (in \cref{lst:defer:synchronize-rcu vs. rcu-barrier}):} \\ > + & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Must Wait Until (in the snippet):} \\ > \cmidrule{2-3} > \multicolumn{1}{c}{Invoked at:} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\tco{synchronize_rcu()}} > & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\tco{rcu_barrier()}} \\ > @@ -384,12 +359,33 @@ The \apik{rcu_barrier()} primitive does this job. > \bottomrule > \end{tabular} > \end{fcvref} > +} > + > +\begin{fcvlabel}[ln:defer:synchonize-rcu vs rcu-barrier] > +\begin{VerbatimN}[commandchars=\\\@\$] > + do_something_1(); \lnlbl@ds1$ > + rcu_read_lock(); \lnlbl@rrl$ > + do_something_2(); \lnlbl@ds2$ > + call_rcu(&p->rh, f); \lnlbl@cr$ > + do_something_3(); \lnlbl@ds3$ > + rcu_read_unlock(); \lnlbl@rrul$ > + do_something_4(); \lnlbl@ds4$ > + // f(&p->rh) invoked \lnlbl@cb$ > + do_something_5(); \lnlbl@ds5$ > +\end{VerbatimN} > +\end{fcvlabel} > \caption{\tco{synchronize_rcu()} vs. \tco{rcu_barrier()}} > \label{tab:defer:synchonize-rcu vs rcu-barrier} > -\end{table*} > +\end{table} > + > + This distinction is illustrated by > + \cref{tab:defer:synchonize-rcu vs rcu-barrier}, in which > + the snippet at the bottom shows code being executed by a given CPU\@. > + For simplicity, assume that no other CPU is executing > + \co{rcu_read_lock()}, \co{rcu_read_unlock()}, or > + \co{call_rcu()}. > > - \Cref{tab:defer:synchonize-rcu vs rcu-barrier} > - shows how long each primitive must wait if invoked > + The table shows how long each primitive must wait if invoked > concurrently with each of the \co{do_something_*()} > functions, with empty cells indicating that no > waiting is necessary. > -- > 2.25.1 > >
