[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1619062560-30483-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:36:00 +0800
From: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Xuefeng Li <lixuefeng@...ngson.cn>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3] bpf: Fix some invalid links in bpf_devel_QA.rst
There exist some errors "404 Not Found" when I click the link
of "MAINTAINERS" [1], "samples/bpf/" [2] and "selftests" [3]
in the documentation "HOWTO interact with BPF subsystem" [4].
As Alexei Starovoitov suggested, just remove "MAINTAINERS" and
"samples/bpf/" links and use correct link of "selftests".
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/MAINTAINERS
[2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/samples/bpf/
[3] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/
[4] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.html
Fixes: 542228384888 ("bpf, doc: convert bpf_devel_QA.rst to use RST formatting")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
---
v3: Remove "MAINTAINERS" and "samples/bpf/" links and
use correct link of "selftests"
v2: Add Fixes: tag
Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst | 17 ++++++++---------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
index 2ed89ab..d05e67e 100644
--- a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
+++ b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ list:
This may also include issues related to XDP, BPF tracing, etc.
Given netdev has a high volume of traffic, please also add the BPF
-maintainers to Cc (from kernel MAINTAINERS_ file):
+maintainers to Cc (from kernel ``MAINTAINERS`` file):
* Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
* Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
@@ -234,11 +234,11 @@ be subject to change.
Q: samples/bpf preference vs selftests?
---------------------------------------
-Q: When should I add code to `samples/bpf/`_ and when to BPF kernel
-selftests_ ?
+Q: When should I add code to ``samples/bpf/`` and when to BPF kernel
+selftests_?
A: In general, we prefer additions to BPF kernel selftests_ rather than
-`samples/bpf/`_. The rationale is very simple: kernel selftests are
+``samples/bpf/``. The rationale is very simple: kernel selftests are
regularly run by various bots to test for kernel regressions.
The more test cases we add to BPF selftests, the better the coverage
@@ -246,9 +246,9 @@ and the less likely it is that those could accidentally break. It is
not that BPF kernel selftests cannot demo how a specific feature can
be used.
-That said, `samples/bpf/`_ may be a good place for people to get started,
+That said, ``samples/bpf/`` may be a good place for people to get started,
so it might be advisable that simple demos of features could go into
-`samples/bpf/`_, but advanced functional and corner-case testing rather
+``samples/bpf/``, but advanced functional and corner-case testing rather
into kernel selftests.
If your sample looks like a test case, then go for BPF kernel selftests
@@ -645,10 +645,9 @@ when:
.. Links
.. _Documentation/process/: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/
-.. _MAINTAINERS: ../../MAINTAINERS
.. _netdev-FAQ: ../networking/netdev-FAQ.rst
-.. _samples/bpf/: ../../samples/bpf/
-.. _selftests: ../../tools/testing/selftests/bpf/
+.. _selftests:
+ https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/
.. _Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kselftest.html
.. _Documentation/bpf/btf.rst: btf.rst
--
2.1.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists