Better fonts and syntax highlighting

Makefile

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ SRC=xv6-riscv-src/
 
 T=latex.out
 
-TEX=$(wildcard $(T)/*.tex)
+TEX=$(foreach file, $(SPELLTEX), $(T)/$(file))
 SPELLTEX=$(wildcard *.tex)
 
 all: book.pdf

book.tex

@@ -1,37 +1,51 @@
 \documentclass[12pt]{book}
 \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
-\usepackage{times}
+\usepackage{helvet}
+\renewcommand{\familydefault}{\sfdefault}
+\usepackage{sourcecodepro}
 \usepackage{listings}
 \usepackage{graphicx}
 \usepackage{xcolor}
 \usepackage{url}
 % \usepackage{showidx}
 \usepackage{imakeidx}
 \usepackage{booktabs}
-\usepackage{url}
 \usepackage{etoolbox}  % for showidx
 \usepackage{fullpage}
 \usepackage{soul}
 \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
+\usepackage{minted}
 
 \usepackage{hyperref}  % should be last
 
 % One space after periods
 \frenchspacing
 
 \hypersetup{pdfauthor={Russ Cox, Frans Kaashoek, Robert Morris},
-            pdftitle={xv6: a simple, Unix-like teaching operating system},}
-
-\lstset{basicstyle=\small\ttfamily}
+            pdftitle={xv6: a simple, Unix-like teaching operating system},
+            colorlinks=true,
+            linkcolor=blue,
+            filecolor=magenta,
+            urlcolor=cyan,}
+\urlstyle{same}
+
+
+\lstset{basicstyle=\normalsize\ttfamily}
 \lstset{morecomment=[is]{[[[}{]]]}}
 \lstset{escapeinside={(*@}{@*)}}
 \lstset{xleftmargin=5.0ex}
+\setminted{
+  fontsize=\normalsize,
+  fontfamily=tt
+}
+\setmintedinline{fontsize=\normalsize}
+\usemintedstyle{vs}
 
-\newcommand{\github}{https://github.com/mit-pdos/xv6-riscv/blob/riscv/}
+\newcommand{\github}{https://github.com/mit-pdos/xv6-riscv/blob/riscv}
 
-\newcommand{\fileref}[1]{\href{\github/#1}{\small{(#1)}}}
-\newcommand{\lineref}[2]{\href{\github/#1\#L#2}{\small{(#1:#2)}}}
-\newcommand{\linerefs}[3]{\href{\github/#1\#L#2-L#3}{\small(#1:#2-#3)}}
+\newcommand{\fileref}[1]{\href{\github/#1}{\normalsize{(#1)}}}
+\renewcommand{\lineref}[2]{\href{\github/#1\#L#2}{\normalsize{(#1:#2)}}}
+\newcommand{\linerefs}[3]{\href{\github/#1\#L#2-L#3}{\normalsize(#1:#2-#3)}}
 
 \newcommand{\indextext}[1]{\textit{#1}\index{#1}}
 \newcommand{\indextextx}[1]{{#1}\index{#1}}
@@ -69,11 +83,11 @@
 \input{latex.out/sum}
 
 {
-% The following prevents latex from splitting a bibliography entry with a page
+% The following prevents LaTeX from splitting a bibliography entry with a page
 % break
 \interlinepenalty=10000
 % Since we're using natbib in numbers mode, we don't need plainnat,
-% which exists to feed authors and years back in to natbib.  As a
+% which exists to feed authors and years back into natbib. As a
 % result, it complains about entries without years, which we don't
 % care about.
 %\bibliographystyle{plainnat}

fs.tex

@@ -454,15 +454,15 @@ \section{Log design}
 \section{Code: logging}
 
 A typical use of the log in a system call looks like this:
-\begin{lstlisting}[]
+\begin{minted}{c}
   begin_op();
   ...
   bp = bread(...);
   bp->data[...] = ...;
   log_write(bp);
   ...
   end_op();
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 
 \indexcode{begin_op}
 \lineref{kernel/log.c:/^begin.op/}
@@ -552,13 +552,13 @@ \section{Code: logging}
 \indexcode{filewrite}
 \lineref{kernel/file.c:/^filewrite/}.
 The transaction looks like this:
-\begin{lstlisting}[]
+\begin{minted}{c}
       begin_op();
       ilock(f->ip);
       r = writei(f->ip, ...);
       iunlock(f->ip);
       end_op();
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 This code is wrapped in a loop that breaks up large writes into individual
 transactions of just a few sectors at a time, to avoid overflowing
 the log.  The call to

lock.tex

@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ \section{Races}
 If there were no concurrent
 requests, you might implement a list \lstinline{push} operation as
 follows:
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=1]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=1]{c}
     struct element {
       int data;
       struct element *next;
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ \section{Races}
       l->next = list; (*@\label{line:next}@*)
       list = l;  (*@\label{line:list}@*)
    }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 
 \begin{figure}[t]
 \center
@@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ \section{Races}
 this makes the scenario above impossible.
 The correctly locked version of the above code
 adds just a few lines (highlighted in yellow):
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=6]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=6]{c}
    struct element *list = 0;
    (*@\hl{struct lock listlock;}@*)
 
@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ \section{Races}
      list = l;           (*@\label{line:list1}@*)
      (*@\hl{release(\&listlock)}; @*)
    }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 The sequence of instructions between
 \lstinline{acquire}
 and
@@ -291,7 +291,7 @@ \section{Code: Locks}
 a word that is zero when the lock is available
 and non-zero when it is held.
 Logically, xv6 should acquire a lock by executing code like
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=21]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=21]{c}
    void
    acquire(struct spinlock *lk) // does not work!
    {
@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ \section{Code: Locks}
        }
      }
    }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 Unfortunately, this implementation does not
 guarantee mutual exclusion on a multiprocessor.
 It could happen that two CPUs simultaneously
@@ -569,7 +569,7 @@ \section{Re-entrant locks}
 sections.  Consider the following two functions \lstinline{f} and
 \lstinline{g}:
 
-\begin{lstlisting}
+\begin{minted}{c}
 struct spinlock lock;
 int data = 0; // protected by lock
 
@@ -591,7 +591,7 @@ \section{Re-entrant locks}
   }
   release(&lock);
 }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 
 Looking at this code fragment, the intuition is that
 \lstinline{call_once} will be called
@@ -743,14 +743,14 @@ \section{Instruction and memory ordering}
 line~\ref{line:next2} to a point after the
 \lstinline{release}
 on line~\ref{line:release}:
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=1]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=1]{c}
       l = malloc(sizeof *l);
       l->data = data;
       acquire(&listlock);
       l->next = list;   (*@\label{line:next2}@*)
       list = l;      
       release(&listlock);  (*@\label{line:release}@*)
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 If such a re-ordering occurred, there would be a window during
 which another CPU could acquire the lock and
 observe the updated

sched.tex

@@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
 and they executed on different CPUs,
 and the compiler didn't optimize too aggressively,
 this implementation would be correct:
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=100]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=100]{c}
   struct semaphore {
     struct spinlock lock;
     int count;
@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
      s->count -= 1;
      release(&s->lock);
   }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 
 The implementation above 
 is expensive.  If the producer acts
@@ -612,7 +612,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
 \lstinline{sleep}
 and
 \lstinline{wakeup} (changes highlighted in yellow):
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=200]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=200]{c}
   void
   V(struct semaphore *s)
   {
@@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
     s->count -= 1;
     release(&s->lock);
   }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 
 % \begin{figure}[t]
 % \center
@@ -697,7 +697,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
 \lstinline{P}
 so that its check of the count and its call to \lstinline{sleep}
 are atomic:
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=300]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=300]{c}
   void
   V(struct semaphore *s)
   {
@@ -716,7 +716,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
     s->count -= 1;
     release(&s->lock);
   }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 One might hope that this version of
 \lstinline{P}
 would avoid the lost wakeup because the lock prevents
@@ -746,7 +746,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
 reacquires the lock before returning.
 Our new correct sleep/wakeup scheme is usable as follows (change
 highlighted in yellow):
-\begin{lstlisting}[numbers=left,firstnumber=400]
+\begin{minted}[linenos,firstnumber=400]{c}
   void
   V(struct semaphore *s)
   {
@@ -765,7 +765,7 @@ \section{Sleep and wakeup}
     s->count -= 1;
     release(&s->lock);
   }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 
 The fact that
 \lstinline{P}
@@ -1543,17 +1543,17 @@ \section{Exercises}
 \linerefs{kernel/proc.c:/DOC: sleeplock0/,/^..}/}.
 Suppose the special case were eliminated by
 replacing
-\begin{lstlisting}[]
+\begin{minted}{c}
 if(lk != &p->lock){
   acquire(&p->lock);
   release(lk);
 }
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 with
-\begin{lstlisting}[]
+\begin{minted}{c}
 release(lk);
 acquire(&p->lock);
-\end{lstlisting}
+\end{minted}
 Doing this would break
 \lstinline{sleep}.
 How?