linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Documentation/sphinx: link dma-buf rsts

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAO_48GG-svRna2Q326VjiTjgT12O5OEg2VPP+_5DkxWc30bO7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Aug 2016 19:03:47 +0530
From:   Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>,
        Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        DRI mailing list <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linaro MM SIG Mailman List <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org>,
        "linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Documentation/sphinx: link dma-buf rsts

Hi Jon,

On 23 August 2016 at 18:38, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Aug 2016 08:01:35 +0200
> Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch> wrote:
>
>> I'm also not too sure about whether dma-buf really should be it's own
>> subdirectory. It's plucked from the device-drivers.tmpl, I think an
>> overall device-drivers/ for all the misc subsystems and support code would
>> be better. Then one toc there, which fans out to either kernel-doc and
>> overview docs.
>
> I'm quite convinced it shouldn't be.
>
> If you get a chance, could you have a look at the "RFC: The beginning of
> a proper driver-api book" series I posted yesterday (yes, I should have
> copied more of you, sorry)?  It shows the direction I would like to go
> with driver API documentation, and, assuming we go that way, I'd like the
> dma-buf documentation to fit into that.
>

Thanks for your comments, and direction. I'll rework the patches on
top of yours then.
I'll have a look at your patches to think about how do we handle API
guides / detailed documentation as well.

> Thanks,
>
> jon

Best,
Sumit.