Re: [GIT PULL] RCU changes for v4.5

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 09:04:24PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 8:20 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 07:28:22PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Paul E. McKenney
> >> <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 01:00:21PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >> > Please pull the latest core-rcu-for-linus git tree from:
> >> >>
> >> >> > One thing I should note is that these pieces of documentation are fairly large
> >> >> > files:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  .../RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.html      | 2897 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >> >> >  .../RCU/Design/Requirements/Requirements.htmlx     | 2741 ++++++++++++++++++
> >> >> >
> >> >> > and are written in HTML, not the usual .txt style. I hope they are fine.
> >> >>
> >> >> Not to mention the PNG image:
> >> >>
> >> >> >  .../RCU/Design/Requirements/2013-08-is-it-dead.png |  Bin 0 -> 100825 bytes
> >> >
> >> > Most diagrams will be .svg.  But if the .png is too objectionable, it
> >> > would not be too big a deal to remove it.
> >> >
> >> > Thoughts?
> >>
> >> Too late, it's in git history...
> >
> > There is always "git rm".  Or is your concern instead the size of the
> > .git/objects directory?
> 
> My only remark is that if we don't want PNGs, they shouldn't enter git history,
> as "git rm" doesn't really remove them. So we can't get rid of the existing
> ones, but we can still think about if we want (no) more of them...

Fair enough!  For whatever it is worth, we do have a number of .pbm,
.ppm, and .pdf files.

								Thanx, Paul