linux-kernel - [RFC 0/4] SCHED_DEADLINE documentation update

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1428494380-1917-1-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it>
Date:	Wed,  8 Apr 2015 13:59:36 +0200
From:	Luca Abeni <lucabe72@...il.com>
To:	peterz@...radead.org
Cc:	henrik@...tad.us, juri.lelli@...il.com, raistlin@...ux.it,
	mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Luca Abeni <luca.abeni@...tn.it>
Subject: [RFC 0/4] SCHED_DEADLINE documentation update

Hi all,

here is the promised update for Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt.
I send it as an RFC because of the following doubts:
1) I split the patches trying to isolate related changes. So,
   - the first patch fixes 2 typos that I noticed when updating the
     documentation
   - the second patch is based on Zhiqiang Zhang's patch and fixes some
     inconsistencies in the symbols used for period and execution times
   - the third patch adds a small discussion about admission tests for EDF on
     single processor systems
   - the fourth patch discusses the multi-processor case, adding some missing
     references
   I am not sure if this split is ok, or if I should do something different
   (should I put all of the changes in a single patch?)
2) The second patch is partly by me and partly by Zhiqiang Zhang. I do not
   know how to preserve Zhiqiang Zhang's authorship, so I added "Based on a
   patch by Zhiqiang Zhang" in the changelog. But I am not sure if this is
   the correct thing to do (maybe I should split this in 2 different patches?)
3) I re-read the added text multiple times, and it looks ok to me... But I am
   not a native speaker, so it might contain English errors or sentences that
   are not clear enough
4) I think I added all the needed references, and Section 3 now looks like a
   self-contained introduction to EDF scheduling... If someone thinks that
   some additional references are needed, let me know and I'll search and
   add them

			Thanks,
					Luca   

Luca Abeni (4):
  Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt: fix typos
  Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt: use consistent namings
  Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt: Some notes on EDF
    schedulability
  Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt: add some references

 Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt |  129 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 113 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.9.5

--
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/