linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] docs: sysctl/kernel: document unaligned controls

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200515231701.7dc1e6b2@heffalump.sk2.org>
Date:   Fri, 15 May 2020 23:17:01 +0200
From:   Stephen Kitt <steve@....org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: sysctl/kernel: document unaligned controls

On Fri, 15 May 2020 20:36:01 +0200, Stephen Kitt <steve@....org> wrote:

> On Fri, 15 May 2020 11:27:35 -0600, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 May 2020 18:04:06 +0200
> > Stephen Kitt <steve@....org> wrote:
> >   
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/index.rst b/Documentation/index.rst
> > > index 9599c0f3eea8..17c38d899572 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/index.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/index.rst
> > > @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ Architecture-agnostic documentation
> > >     :maxdepth: 2
> > >  
> > >     asm-annotations
> > > +   unaligned-memory-access
> > >  
> > >  Architecture-specific documentation
> > >  -----------------------------------
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt
> > > b/Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.rst similarity index 100%
> > > rename from Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.txt
> > > rename to Documentation/unaligned-memory-access.rst    
> > 
> > Adding this to the toctree is great, but I'd just as soon not leave it in
> > the top-level directory while we do that.  Since you're renaming it
> > anyway, can you move it into process/?  It's not a perfect fit, but that's
> > where that type of material has been going so far.  
> 
> I can indeed. Should it still be listed in the main toctree, or in the
> process toctree?

Never mind, I found the answer, “some overall technical guides that have been
put here for now for lack of a better place” ;-).

Regards,

Stephen

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped