[PATCH] c-user: Document CONFIGURE_DIRTY_MEMORY

[Sebastian Huber]

On 11/02/2020 07:12, Chris Johns wrote:

>>>>> +NOTES:
>>>>> +    Dirtying memory can add significantly to system boot time.  It may assist
>>>>> +    in finding code that assumes memory starts set to zero.  In case
>>>> .. "assumes memory starts set to zero" does not look right to me?
>>>>
>>> At first I disagreed, but then it does seem ambiguous, whether it
>>> means the starting address is 0 or the value is 0.
>>>
>>> It should be clarified, "memory values start set to zero" or "set to
>>> all zeroes" to make it clear memory is meant in the plural sense.
>> The FreeBSD man page uses "The memory is set to zero." Should I change it to:
>>
>> "It may assist in finding code that assumes the content of free memory areas is
>> cleared to zero during system initialization."
> Nice. A minor tweak ...
>
> ... incorrectly assumes the contents ... ?

Ok, I fixed it in two steps like this:

https://git.rtems.org/rtems-docs/commit/?id=0cdd4823fc05429ae834a18d8fca67594b249775

https://git.rtems.org/rtems-docs/commit/?id=c95724b793297994685804fcdaeb324a23cf1fd7

|NOTES: Dirtying memory can add significantly to system boot time. It 
may assist in finding code that incorrectly assumes the contents of free 
memory areas is cleared to zero during system initialization. In case 
:ref:`CONFIGURE_ZERO_WORKSPACE_AUTOMATICALLY` is also defined, then the 
memory is first dirtied and then zeroed. Hm, should this be now: |
||the contents of free memory areas ARE cleared to zero I probably 
should have sent this stuff for review first.| |

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20200211/bce4c2a6/attachment-0001.html>