[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250127-passionate-scallop-of-exercise-bcfa03@leitao>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 09:10:49 -0800
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org,
kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next v3 8/8] netconsole: docs: Add documentation
for CPU number auto-population
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 05:15:10PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > +CPU number auto population in userdata
> > +--------------------------------------
> > +
> > +Inside the netconsole configfs hierarchy, there is a file called
> > +`cpu_nr` under the `userdata` directory. This file is used to enable or disable
> > +the automatic CPU number population feature. This feature automatically
> > +populates the CPU number that is sending the message.
>
> Biking shedding a bit, but to me `cpu_nr` is the number of a
> CPU. However, you want this to be an enable/disable feature. Would
> `cpu_nr_enable`, or `cpu_nr_auto_populate` be clearer?
Agree, I think `cpu_nr_enable` is way better than just `cpu_nr`. I will
update.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists