Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
Additionally to the "commit <sha1> upstream." variant, "[ Upstream
commit <sha1> ]" is used as well as alternative to refer to the upstream
commit hash.
Signed-off-by: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
---
Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
index c61865e91f52..2fd8aa593a28 100644
--- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
+++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
@@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this:
commit <sha1> upstream.
+or alternatively:
+
+.. code-block:: none
+
+ [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
+
Additionally, some patches submitted via :ref:`option_1` may have additional
patch prerequisites which can be cherry-picked. This can be specified in the
following format in the sign-off area:
--
2.36.1
Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> writes:
> Additionally to the "commit <sha1> upstream." variant, "[ Upstream
> commit <sha1> ]" is used as well as alternative to refer to the upstream
> commit hash.
>
> Signed-off-by: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
> ---
> Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
So this is a nit but...
> diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> index c61865e91f52..2fd8aa593a28 100644
> --- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this:
>
> commit <sha1> upstream.
>
> +or alternatively:
> +
> +.. code-block:: none
> +
> + [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
Can this just be:
or alternatively::
[ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
That extra RST markup just clutters things without any advantage.
Thanks,
jon
Hi Jonathan,
On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 06:54:59AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> writes:
>
> > Additionally to the "commit <sha1> upstream." variant, "[ Upstream
> > commit <sha1> ]" is used as well as alternative to refer to the upstream
> > commit hash.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 6 ++++++
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> So this is a nit but...
>
> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> > index c61865e91f52..2fd8aa593a28 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst
> > @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this:
> >
> > commit <sha1> upstream.
> >
> > +or alternatively:
> > +
> > +.. code-block:: none
> > +
> > + [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
>
> Can this just be:
>
> or alternatively::
>
> [ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
>
> That extra RST markup just clutters things without any advantage.
Btw, after revisiting, I think Greg actually can pick up the first
version of the patch. Changing the above without adding the
code-block:node will reformat the
[ Upstream commit <sha1> ]
differently when rendering to html.
Greg, so as the patch has not yet been commited, can you pick up the
first version from
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220809045543.2049293-1-carnil@debian.org/
?
Regards,
Salvatore
On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:27:58AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 06:54:59AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> writes: > > > > > Additionally to the "commit <sha1> upstream." variant, "[ Upstream > > > commit <sha1> ]" is used as well as alternative to refer to the upstream > > > commit hash. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> > > > --- > > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 6 ++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > So this is a nit but... > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > > index c61865e91f52..2fd8aa593a28 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > > +++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > > @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this: > > > > > > commit <sha1> upstream. > > > > > > +or alternatively: > > > + > > > +.. code-block:: none > > > + > > > + [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > > > Can this just be: > > > > or alternatively:: > > > > [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > > > That extra RST markup just clutters things without any advantage. > > Btw, after revisiting, I think Greg actually can pick up the first > version of the patch. Changing the above without adding the > code-block:node will reformat the > > [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > differently when rendering to html. > > Greg, so as the patch has not yet been commited, can you pick up the > first version from > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220809045543.2049293-1-carnil@debian.org/ > ? Please resend it as v3 so that our tools don't try to apply v2. thanks, greg k-h
Hi Greg, On Thu, Sep 01, 2022 at 05:59:08PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 10:27:58AM +0200, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > Hi Jonathan, > > > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 06:54:59AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > > Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> writes: > > > > > > > Additionally to the "commit <sha1> upstream." variant, "[ Upstream > > > > commit <sha1> ]" is used as well as alternative to refer to the upstream > > > > commit hash. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 6 ++++++ > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > So this is a nit but... > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > > > index c61865e91f52..2fd8aa593a28 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > > > +++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > > > @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this: > > > > > > > > commit <sha1> upstream. > > > > > > > > +or alternatively: > > > > + > > > > +.. code-block:: none > > > > + > > > > + [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > > > > > Can this just be: > > > > > > or alternatively:: > > > > > > [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > > > > > That extra RST markup just clutters things without any advantage. > > > > Btw, after revisiting, I think Greg actually can pick up the first > > version of the patch. Changing the above without adding the > > code-block:node will reformat the > > > > [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > > > differently when rendering to html. > > > > Greg, so as the patch has not yet been commited, can you pick up the > > first version from > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220809045543.2049293-1-carnil@debian.org/ > > ? > > Please resend it as v3 so that our tools don't try to apply v2. Okay right, make sense! Just sumitted v3 with the original version of the documentation patch. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220901184328.4075701-1-carnil@debian.org/ Regards, Salvatore
Hi Jonathan, On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 06:54:59AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> writes: > > > Additionally to the "commit <sha1> upstream." variant, "[ Upstream > > commit <sha1> ]" is used as well as alternative to refer to the upstream > > commit hash. > > > > Signed-off-by: Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> > > --- > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst | 6 ++++++ > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > So this is a nit but... > > > diff --git a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > index c61865e91f52..2fd8aa593a28 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > +++ b/Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this: > > > > commit <sha1> upstream. > > > > +or alternatively: > > + > > +.. code-block:: none > > + > > + [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > Can this just be: > > or alternatively:: > > [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > That extra RST markup just clutters things without any advantage. Okay, I just have sent a v2 dropping it. Salvatore
On 8/9/22 11:55, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this: > > commit <sha1> upstream. > > +or alternatively: > + > +.. code-block:: none > + > + [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > + Looks OK. Indeed Sasha uses the alternative style. Reviewed-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 03:30:46PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > On 8/9/22 11:55, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: > > @@ -97,6 +97,12 @@ text, like this: > > > > commit <sha1> upstream. > > > > +or alternatively: > > + > > +.. code-block:: none > > + > > + [ Upstream commit <sha1> ] > > + > > Looks OK. Indeed Sasha uses the alternative style. > > Reviewed-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> Thanks, I'll queue this up after -rc1 is out. greg k-h
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.