linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] Documentation: document /sys/devices/system/cpu/

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091022171550.GC21728@ldl.fc.hp.com>
Date:	Thu, 22 Oct 2009 11:15:50 -0600
From:	Alex Chiang <achiang@...com>
To:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@...ah.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Documentation: document /sys/devices/system/cpu/

* David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, Alex Chiang wrote:
> 
> > Hi Greg, Randy,
> > 
> > Not sure who actually maintains Documentation/ABI/; if it's not either of
> > y'all then please point me at the correct maintainer.
> > 
> > Anyhow, I was proposing some patches to enhance the NUMA sysfs interface:
> > 
> > 	http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/40084/
> > 
> > I documented my changes, but David Rientjes suggested that I take this
> > as an opportunity to do a more thorough job, so here is an attempt at
> > doing so by documenting at least the files that I saw on my system. Maybe
> > there are more that I didn't configure in, but I think this series covers
> > a good amount.
> > 
> 
> Fantastic, thanks Alex!
> 
> One thing I noticed in patches 3-6 of this series is you've attached 
> multiple files to a single "What:" line.  That hasn't been done before 
> (ignore the style violations of sysfs-firmware-*) and I think it would be 
> better to seperate each file out into its own section.

Ok, I can do that.

I was originally going for compactness, but I understand the
point you make below.

> I know it's long, but I think some automated scripts are eventually going 
> to use this documentation and it's best to follow the guidelines in 
> Documentation/ABI/README.

What do you think about keeping all the descriptions in the same
file, sysfs-devices-system-cpu vs. splitting them out into
separate files, sysfs-devices-system-cpu-topology, e.g.?

Will your tools be able to handle that?

Thanks.
/ac

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/