On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 7:22 AM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 07:15:56AM +0800, Zhouyi Zhou wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 7:09 AM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 28, 2023 at 11:55:00AM +0800, zhouzhouyi@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > > From: Zhouyi Zhou <zhouzhouyi@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Rewrite Quick Quiz 3.6 for clarity and explicitness, so that the
> > > > firsttime reader know that another choice is CPU 0 sharing a core
> > > > with CPU 1.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Zhouyi Zhou<zhouzhouyi@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > hi Paul and Akira
> > > >
> > > > This minor fix is also reported by our Chinese version editor
> > > > Yunjing Li.
> > >
> > > I have pulled this in, thanks to both you and the editor! Would it be
> > > appropriate to have the editor's reported-by? (I trust your judgment
> > > on this. I am only asking, not in any way suggesting a change.)
> > I think I should have the editor's report-by, but she is too modest to
> > offer her email-address,
> > because she thinks this is her job.
> >
> > Could we add reported-by without an email address ? ;-)
>
> We could just add a line saying something like:
>
> This change was identified by XXX YYYYY in the course of
> translating the book to Chinese.
>
> Or something similar. What would our editor like best?
>
> For another option, I do sometimes do "Reported-by: LWN user xxxx"
> or similar.
Thank Paul for your wonderful suggestion!
I guess our editor will like the first option best ;-)
I will send a new version of patch soon.
Thanks, Paul
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> > Thanx, Zhouyi
> > >
> > > Thanx, Paul
> > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Zhouyi
> > > > --
> > > > cpu/overheads.tex | 3 ++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/cpu/overheads.tex b/cpu/overheads.tex
> > > > index 1ee9c52f..a2ec2998 100644
> > > > --- a/cpu/overheads.tex
> > > > +++ b/cpu/overheads.tex
> > > > @@ -262,7 +262,8 @@ CAS and lock, respectively.
> > > > \QuickQuiz{
> > > > \Cref{tab:cpu:CPU 0 View of Synchronization Mechanisms on 8-Socket System With Intel Xeon Platinum 8176 CPUs at 2.10GHz}
> > > > shows CPU~0 sharing a core with CPU~224.
> > > > - Shouldn't that instead be CPU~1???
> > > > + However, isn't it more logical for CPU 0
> > > > + to share a core with CPU 1 instead of CPU 224???
> > > > }\QuickQuizAnswer{
> > > > It is easy to be sympathetic to this view, but the file
> > > > \path{/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cache/index0/shared_cpu_list}
> > > > --
> > > > 2.34.1
> > > >
> >
