Wookey writes:
> Given that we do not really have agreement here on what should go in the
> source itself, perhaps a separate document describing the ARM-specific
> parts of the kernel and relevant resources is the way to go?
Separate documents aren't generally a good idea either. The problem here is
that they soon get out of step. From what I've heard on the linux kernel
mailing list, it has some sections dating back to the 1.2.xx days, even
though the code has moved on since then. The problem is that it contains
errors wrt the latest code.
What has recently been incorporated into the kernel is "DocBook"-style
documentation. This allows the header comments for C functions to be
incorporated into a document.
I'm not saying that this is a good way for assembler - in fact it's the
wrong thing to do really.
_____
|_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
| | Russell King [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- ---
| | | | http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ / / |
| +-+-+ --- -+-
/ | THE developer of ARM Linux |+| /|\
/ | | | --- |
+-+-+ ------------------------------------------------- /\\\ |
unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
++ Please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for ++
++ kernel-related discussions. ++
