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: <20210316054727.25655-1-foxhlchen@gmail.com> <20210316054727.25655-2-foxhlchen@gmail.com>
 <20210419021730.GV2531743@casper.infradead.org> <CAC2o3D+kq+U9vSp_9DNM3UGA=UGhS84Y+mwm=9S6eMPpf2-ogQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210419032513.GW2531743@casper.infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <20210419032513.GW2531743@casper.infradead.org>
From:   Fox Chen <foxhlchen@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Apr 2021 11:33:05 +0800
Message-ID: <CAC2o3DLJpMJDzQByJixPyLe47ajXXVFPRQBh3MaYPargrqS4tg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] docs: path-lookup: update follow_managed() part
To:     Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc:     Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        vegard.nossum@oracle.com, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        rdunlap@infradead.org, grandmaster@al2klimov.de,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 11:25 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:33:00AM +0800, Fox Chen wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 10:17 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 01:47:16PM +0800, Fox Chen wrote:
> > > > -In the absence of symbolic links, ``walk_component()`` creates a new
> > > > +As the last step of ``walk_component()``, ``step_into()`` will be called either
> > >
> > > You can drop ``..`` from around function named which are followed with
> > > ().  d74b0d31ddde ("Docs: An initial automarkup extension for sphinx")
> > > marks them up automatically.
> > >
> >
> > Got it, thanks for letting me know. But I will still use them in this
> > patch series to keep consistency with the remaining parts of the
> > document.
>
> Well, you weren't.  For example:
>
> +As the last step of ``walk_component()``, ``step_into()`` will be called either
> +directly from walk_component() or from handle_dots().  It calls
> +``handle_mount()``, to check and handle mount points, in which a new
>
> Neither of the functions on the second line were using ``.

Oh, That was a mistake,  They should've been wrapped with ``.
Thanks for pointing it out. I will go through the whole patch set and
fix this type of inconsistency in V3.


thanks,
fox