linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] Documentation: livepatch: document reliable stacktrace

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]

Date:   Mon, 18 Jan 2021 12:21:35 +0000
From:   Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
        Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        live-patching@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...rt.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Documentation: livepatch: document reliable stacktrace

On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 10:20:14AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 17:12:51 +0000
> Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 04:47:18PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 02:24:46PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:  
> > 
> > > > +    3. Considerations
> > > > +       3.1 Identifying successful termination  
> > 
> > > It looks like we forgot to update this with the addition of the new
> > > section 3, so this needs a trivial update to add that and fix the
> > > numbering.  
> > 
> > Bah, I thought the point with structured documentation formats was that
> > tooling would handle stuff like this :/
> 
> The tooling *will* handle it if you let it, it's a simple matter of
> replacing the hand-generated table of contents with a Sphinx directive.  I
> think that's generally the right thing to do, but it does have the
> downside of only putting the TOC in the generated docs.

Ah, I was not aware of that, and I had copied the TOC style from
Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.rst.

That does sound like the right thing to do generally, and I have no
problem doing that here, but I guess we be consistent and either do that
for all or none of the Documentation/livepatch/*.rst documents. I guess
we could do that as a followup?

Thanks,
Mark.