From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762650AbYEFFzP (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 01:55:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753890AbYEFFzA (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 01:55:00 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:39065 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752175AbYEFFzA (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 May 2008 01:55:00 -0400 Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 22:54:34 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, skumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, yamamoto@valinux.co.jp, menage@google.com, lizf@cn.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rientjes@google.com, xemul@openvz.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com Subject: Re: [-mm][PATCH 4/4] Add rlimit controller documentation Message-Id: <20080505225434.3f81828b.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <481FEF28.1000502@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20080503213726.3140.68845.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080503213825.3140.4328.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20080505153509.da667caf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <481FEF28.1000502@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 06 May 2008 11:09:52 +0530 Balbir Singh wrote: > > Ho hum, I had to do rather a lot of guesswork here to try to understand > > your proposed overall design for this feature. I'd prefer to hear about > > your design via more direct means. > > Do you have any suggestions on how to do that better. Would you like > documentation to be the first patch in the series? I had sent out two RFC's > earlier and got comments and feedback from several people. > I do like to see the overall what-i-am-setting-out-to-do description in there somewhere - sometimes a Docuemtation/ file is appropriate, other times do it via changelog. But the first part of the review is reviewing whatever it is which you set out to achieve. Once that's understood and sounds like a good idea then we can start looking at how you did it.