linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] Begin reorganizing the arch documentation

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: <87cz4zb8xu.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
Date:   Thu, 23 Mar 2023 12:48:29 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] Begin reorganizing the arch documentation

Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> writes:

> On 3/15/23 14:15, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> On the other hand, it *is* a fair amount of churn.  If it's more than
>> people can handle, I'll quietly back away and we'll muddle along as we have
>> been; this isn't something I'm going to dig in my heels over.
>
> I'm not fundamentally opposed to this.  It'll probably cost me a few
> keystrokes in moments of confusion, but that's the price of progress. :)
>
> Things in Documentation/ have also been mobile enough in recent years
> that I tend to "find Documentation | grep something" rather than try to
> remember the paths for things.  Adding an arch/ in there won't hurt
> anything.

So, if I'm not going to get tarred and feathered for this, I'd like to
proceed, and am wondering what the best way is.  Patch 1 is a pure docs
change that won't affect anybody.  I could also apply #2 if I could get
an ack from the x86 community, but that is sure to create conflicts with
tip and get us all more cheery notes from Stephen Rothwell.

I could do the "fix up and send at the end of the merge window" trick
with it.  Or perhaps some of this should go via tip?  Suggestions
welcome.

Thanks,

jon