[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8514c830-319b-33e9-025a-79d399674fb3@web.de>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 20:12:17 +0100
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Documentation: bootconfig: Update boot configuration
documentation
> +This allows administrators to pass a structured-Key configuration file
Does capitalisation matter here for the word “Key”?
> +If you think that kernel/init options becomes too long to write in boot-loader
> +configuration file or want to comment on each options, you can use this
Can the following wording variant be a bit nicer?
+… or you want to comment on each option, …
> +Also, some subsystem may depend on the boot configuration, and it has own
> +root key.
Would you like to explain the influence of a key hierarchy any further?
> +The boot configuration syntax allows user to merge partially same word keys
> by brace. For example::
“by braces.
For example::”?
> +The file /proc/bootconfig is a user-space interface to the configuration
“… is an user-…”?
> +Currently the maximum configuration size is 32 KiB and the total number
> +of key-words and values must be under 1024 nodes.
* How were these constraints chosen?
* Can such system limits become more configurable?
> +(Note: Each key consists of words separated by dot, and value also consists
> +of values separated by comma. Here, each word and each value is generally
> +called a "node".)
I would prefer the interpretation that nodes contain corresponding attributes.
How do you think about to add a link to a formal file format description?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists