[PATCH] Slightly outdated CONFIG_SMP documentation fix
From: akpm@linux-foundation.org (Andrew Morton)
Date: 2014-01-02 23:15:47
Also in:
linux-alpha, linux-mips
Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)
- 2014-01-02 · [PATCH] Slightly outdated CONFIG_SMP documentation fix · akpm@linux-foundation.org (Andrew Morton)
- 2014-01-02 · [PATCH] Slightly outdated CONFIG_SMP documentation fix · dhowells@redhat.com (David Howells)
- 2013-12-31 · [PATCH] Slightly outdated CONFIG_SMP documentation fix · hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin)
- 2013-12-31 · [PATCH] Slightly outdated CONFIG_SMP documentation fix · Robert Graffham <hidden>
- 2013-12-22 · [PATCH] Slightly outdated CONFIG_SMP documentation fix · Psychedelic Squid <hidden>
On Thu, 2 Jan 2014 23:08:43 +0000 Psychedelic Squid [off-list ref] wrote:
On 2 Jan 2014 23:02, "Andrew Morton" [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 14:56:29 +0000 David Howells [off-list ref]wrote:quoted
quoted
Robert Graffham [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
+ singleprocessor machines. On a singleprocessor machine, thekernelquoted
quoted
"singleprocessor" looks wrong without a hyphen. How about"uniprocessor"?quoted
quoted
Yes please. Also the patch should have a signed-off-by:, as per Documentation/SubmittingPatches section 12, please.The signed-off-by: is already there.
ah, it was appended after the patch. Don't do that ;)
I'll get the other changes for the revised patch ready shortly, thanks. Also, newbie submitter and l couldn't find this in the documentation at a quick glance: should I submit it as a new thread, or a continuation of this?
Either is OK. I tend to prefer continuation-of-this, mainly because it prevents people from forgetting to cc people who were involved in earlier discussion. (Of course, if the discussion graph was complex, no reply-to-all will capture all participants. Nobody bothers to go through the discussion gathering the names of all participants so I often end up doing this when putting the final patch together)