> > Are any updates to the documentation necessary for the revised vanity > > naming kernel code? > > It depends on how much of the documentation we want to update with this > fast-track. There are certainly many implementation details contained in > the design document that are not exactly reflective of the updated code. > The code currently in dls_mgmt.c (which I think is what you're > referring to) would fall into that category, and was discussed in section > 6.2.2 of the design document.
I think the design document should be reflective of what we plan to integrate. (I know things tend to diverge over time after integration, but I think that's a separate problem.) -- meem
