[lkml]   [2017]   [Nov]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] refcount: provide same memory ordering guarantees as in atomic_t
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:09:57AM +0000, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> <snip>
> > Note that there's work done on better documents and updates to this one.
> > One document that might be good to read (I have not in fact had time to
> > read it myself yet :-():
> >
> >
> > model/blob/master/Documentation/explanation.txt
> I have just finished reading over this and must say that this is excellent.
> If I would have started reading on this topic from this doc and then move
> to other in-tree docs, including memory-barriers.txt, I would
> have had much less issues/questions and it would be much less of a bumpy
> read.

Glad you like it! May we have your Acked-by?

> Is there any plan to include it into official kernel doc tree? I really think it
> would be very helpful for others also even basically to explain the notations, properties
> and language people talk about these issues and give examples.

Yes, we do plan to submit it for inclusion.

Thanx, Paul

> I will try to improve a bit the new doc I have previously sent a patch for in the
> spirit of this reading.
> Best Regards,
> Elena.

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-11-13 14:20    [W:0.169 / U:0.108 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site