2020-12-09 15:18:49

by Jonathan Corbet

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [External] linux-next: build failure after merge of the pm tree

On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:56:31 -0500
Mark Pearson <[email protected]> wrote:

> I do see:
> WARNING: document isn't included in any toctree
> but I think this is benign - I believe I'm getting it just because I
> converted the file to .rst (as requested by Andy Shevchenko). If this is
> important and needs to be addressed urgently as well let me know.

Normally this is solved by adding the newly created document to the
index.rst file in the same directory.

There isn't one in Documentation/ABI/testing, though; in fact, there are
no RST files there. Files in Documentation/ABI are in a special format
that is processed into RST during the docs build. If we want to add
information outside of any specific ABI entry there, we're going to have
to decide how we want to do that. It may well be, though, that the
introductory information just belongs in the admin guide instead.

Thanks,

jon


2020-12-10 01:44:11

by Mark Pearson

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [External] linux-next: build failure after merge of the pm tree

Hi Jon,

On 09/12/2020 09:33, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2020 08:56:31 -0500 Mark Pearson
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I do see: WARNING: document isn't included in any toctree but I
>> think this is benign - I believe I'm getting it just because I
>> converted the file to .rst (as requested by Andy Shevchenko). If
>> this is important and needs to be addressed urgently as well let me
>> know.
>
> Normally this is solved by adding the newly created document to the
> index.rst file in the same directory.
>
> There isn't one in Documentation/ABI/testing, though; in fact, there
> are no RST files there. Files in Documentation/ABI are in a special
> format that is processed into RST during the docs build. If we want
> to add information outside of any specific ABI entry there, we're
> going to have to decide how we want to do that. It may well be,
> though, that the introductory information just belongs in the admin
> guide instead.
>

Should I just revert this file to plain text format?

I converted it to rst (as was requested) but I'm wondering if I'm just
causing a bunch of headaches and people are going to be cursing the one
weird random rst file in that directory going forwards :)

Mark