Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201105174549.614c2de4@canb.auug.org.au> <20201105070311.GU4879@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20201105070311.GU4879@kernel.org>
From:   "Anand K. Mistry" <amistry@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:42:23 +1100
Message-ID: <CAATStaMD=w+onf==L-=MQ7suJf6EaNoup5o8yW-TEbfajkbdaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the akpm-current tree
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 18:03, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 05:45:49PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> > produced this warning:
> >
> > Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst:296: WARNING: Malformed table.
> > Text in column margin in table line 61.
> >
> > ==========================  ===================================================
> > Field                       Content
> > ==========================  ===================================================
>   ...
> > Speculation_Store_Bypass    speculative store bypass mitigation status
> > Speculation_Indirect_Branch indirect branch speculation mode
>   ...
> > ==========================  ===================================================
> > Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst:234: WARNING: Error parsing content block for the "table" directive: exactly one table expected.
>
> Looks like left column became too wide, so rather than shift the right
> column to the right, I'd suggest to drop underscores in Speculation*.

Hm. That makes it inconsistent with Speculation_Store_Bypass. I guess
it's the lesser of two evils.

How would I go about fixing this? Send a new (v2), fixed patch to the
mailing list? I'm not that familiar with how patches get merged
through the branches.

>
> >
> > .. table:: Table 1-2: Contents of the status files (as of 4.19)
> >
> >  ==========================  ===================================================
> >  Field                       Content
> >  ==========================  ===================================================
>    ...
> >  Speculation_Store_Bypass    speculative store bypass mitigation status
> >  Speculation_Indirect_Branch indirect branch speculation mode
> >  Cpus_allowed                mask of CPUs on which this process may run
> >  Cpus_allowed_list           Same as previous, but in "list format"
> >  Mems_allowed                mask of memory nodes allowed to this process
> >  Mems_allowed_list           Same as previous, but in "list format"
> >  voluntary_ctxt_switches     number of voluntary context switches
> >  nonvoluntary_ctxt_switches  number of non voluntary context switches
> >  ==========================  ===================================================
>
> Same here.
>
> > Introduced by commit
> >
> >   60b492d745d5 ("proc: provide details on indirect branch speculation")
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Stephen Rothwell
>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.


-- 
Anand K. Mistry
Software Engineer
Google Australia