[PATCH] Documentation: cpuset: Fix 'cpuset.tasks' -> 'tasks'

[PATCH] Documentation: cpuset: Fix 'cpuset.tasks' -> 'tasks'

[W. Trevor King]

This looks like it was accidentally caught up in e21a05cb (doc:
cpuset: Update the cpuset flag file, 2010-02-24).

While I'm touching the line, also fix the posessive "cpusets" ->
"cpuset's".

Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
---
 Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

This patch is based on v4.9, but the lines I'm touching don't churn
much so it should apply to any recent version.

diff --git a/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt b/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt
index e5ac5da86..8402dd6 100644
--- a/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt
+++ b/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt
@@ -615,7 +615,7 @@ to allocate a page of memory for that task.
 
 If a cpuset has its 'cpuset.cpus' modified, then each task in that cpuset
 will have its allowed CPU placement changed immediately.  Similarly,
-if a task's pid is written to another cpusets 'cpuset.tasks' file, then its
+if a task's pid is written to another cpuset's 'tasks' file, then its
 allowed CPU placement is changed immediately.  If such a task had been
 bound to some subset of its cpuset using the sched_setaffinity() call,
 the task will be allowed to run on any CPU allowed in its new cpuset,
-- 
2.1.0.60.g85f0837

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: cpuset: Fix 'cpuset.tasks' -> 'tasks'

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 14:24:27 -0800
"W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us> wrote:

> This looks like it was accidentally caught up in e21a05cb (doc:
> cpuset: Update the cpuset flag file, 2010-02-24).
> 
> While I'm touching the line, also fix the posessive "cpusets" ->
> "cpuset's".
> 
> Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
> ---
>  Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> This patch is based on v4.9, but the lines I'm touching don't churn
> much so it should apply to any recent version.
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt b/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt
> index e5ac5da86..8402dd6 100644
> --- a/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/cgroup-v1/cpusets.txt
> @@ -615,7 +615,7 @@ to allocate a page of memory for that task.
>  
>  If a cpuset has its 'cpuset.cpus' modified, then each task in that cpuset
>  will have its allowed CPU placement changed immediately.  Similarly,
> -if a task's pid is written to another cpusets 'cpuset.tasks' file, then its
> +if a task's pid is written to another cpuset's 'tasks' file, then its

So I'll confess that I don't understand this change.  All of the control
files are referred to as cpuset.whatever in this document; why should
this one, in particular, be different?

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: cpuset: Fix 'cpuset.tasks' -> 'tasks'

[W. Trevor King]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 754 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 10:27:42AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > -if a task's pid is written to another cpusets 'cpuset.tasks' file, then its
> > +if a task's pid is written to another cpuset's 'tasks' file, then its
> 
> So I'll confess that I don't understand this change.  All of the
> control files are referred to as cpuset.whatever in this document;
> why should this one, in particular, be different?

'tasks' is part of the generic cgroup tooling, so it doesn't get the
cpuset prefix:

  $ ls /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/*tasks*
  /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/tasks

Cheers,
Trevor

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] Documentation: cpuset: Fix 'cpuset.tasks' -> 'tasks'

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 09:44:34 -0800
"W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us> wrote:

> > So I'll confess that I don't understand this change.  All of the
> > control files are referred to as cpuset.whatever in this document;
> > why should this one, in particular, be different?  
> 
> 'tasks' is part of the generic cgroup tooling, so it doesn't get the
> cpuset prefix:

Duh, of course.  Got more coffee now and applied it, thanks.

jon