Re: [PATCH RESEND 3/4] Documentation/litmus-tests: Merge atomic's README into top-level one
From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
Date: 2020-05-15 15:01:48
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, 14 May 2020 15:45:58 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 07:03:33AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:quoted
On Thu, 14 May 2020 10:16:56 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:quoted
On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 08:46:18AM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:quoted
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 06:39:03AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:quoted
From 96fa6680e3b990633ecbb6d11acf03a161b790bd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 10 May 2020 15:12:57 +0900 Subject: [PATCH RESEND 3/4] Documentation/litmus-tests: Merge atomic's README into top-level one Where Documentation/litmus-tests/README lists RCU litmus tests, Documentation/litmus-tests/atomic/README lists atomic litmus tests. For symmetry, merge the latter into former, with some context adjustment in the introduction. Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com> Acked-by: Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@gmail.com> Acked-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <redacted>Acked-by: Boqun Feng <redacted> Thanks!Applied, and thank you all! I rebased, cancelling the revert with the original, resulting in an updated lkmm branch on -rcu. There was one minor conflict, so could one of you please check to make sure that I resolved things appropriately?One thing I noticed. Commit b2998782ded4 ("Documentation/litmus-tests: Clarify about the RCU pre-initialization test")'s change log says: Since this test returned to tools/memory-model/, make sure that it is ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ at least referenced from Documentation/litmus-tests/'s README. Because of the rebase, this needs amendment as well as the title. Something like Documentation/litumus-tests: Cite a relevant litmus test in tools/memory-model For ease of finding the RCU related litmus test under tools/memory-model/, add an entry in README. ?Good catch, and yes, I will update that on the next rebase. Any other things in need of adjustment?
Aside from the missing Signed-off-by tags Stephen pointed out, I don't
see anything.
Thanks, Akira
Thanx, Paul