Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A92D7C433FE for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 00:36:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242491AbhLHAjv (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2021 19:39:51 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48366 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229503AbhLHAjt (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Dec 2021 19:39:49 -0500 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org (sin.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:40e1:4800::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C905C061574; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 16:36:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C6A11CE1D63; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 00:36:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 95194C341C3; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 00:36:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1638923774; bh=7SzqkW8JF55HGh0LF16R7xhuRyiyRTDHwS0M3iF277g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Ps+HYLd2q1aVVELfDF+wMAHNTcoP6JDd83AlbUrxoBy0D6IetmkzNQwfB/g8QtBn6 TFazPXtqUVsNYa6yyDRSOIvc5Rn5RInHU9Kfr3/Wig7ONTPBkDFpCSPwnQYgSkwBDm b+LeE+7n2XdM9bqIW5+VehCqVdJkKucR3MSe4btsBQNzXISNttOnbqh3UO1dKspUL7 3CZHYUdvNEMu3AuT5Kd53Lz15L9MuhSdybhTwtqmCudwZLlDtHtvM8OdqXeMK5EPUU pB96khOg4Io266M1EHxY0MOtEMFgqxrrWkvQzu1n4H2W98ZTmtYnACKnYLEKg7qCe1 47ZNOjfH6Gv/Q== Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 16:36:13 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Bart Van Assche Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] docs: consolidate sysfs-block into Documentation/ABI/ Message-ID: References: <20211201084524.25660-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <0bf11301-4085-f4a1-eeed-c65d0e5563b4@acm.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 01:05:39PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 11:32:45AM -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > On 12/1/21 12:45 AM, Eric Biggers wrote: > > > This series consolidates the documentation for /sys/block//queue/ > > > into Documentation/ABI/, where it is supposed to go (as per Greg KH: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/YaXXpEAwVGTLjp1e@kroah.com). > > > > > > This series also updates MAINTAINERS to associate the block > > > documentation with the block layer. > > > > > > This series applies to linux-block/for-next. > > > > > > Eric Biggers (7): > > > docs: sysfs-block: sort alphabetically > > > docs: sysfs-block: add contact for nomerges > > > docs: sysfs-block: fill in missing documentation from queue-sysfs.rst > > > docs: sysfs-block: document stable_writes > > > docs: sysfs-block: document virt_boundary_mask > > > docs: block: remove queue-sysfs.rst > > > MAINTAINERS: add entries for block layer documentation > > > > > > Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-block | 766 ++++++++++++++++++-------- > > > Documentation/block/index.rst | 1 - > > > Documentation/block/queue-sysfs.rst | 321 ----------- > > > MAINTAINERS | 2 + > > > 4 files changed, 545 insertions(+), 545 deletions(-) > > > delete mode 100644 Documentation/block/queue-sysfs.rst > > > > How about adding a patch that moves Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-block > > to Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-block? The block layer sysfs ABI is used > > widely by user space software and is considered stable. > > > > That would make sense. I decided not to include it in this patch series since > some of the sysfs-block files were added recently, so may not be as "stable" as > ones that have been around for 18 years, and because about 90% of the sysfs > documentation is in the "testing" directory anyway so it is not unusual. So I > felt it should be a separate change. > > I think these patches should go in first, and then I can send a separate patch > that moves the file to the stable directory, if there is no objection to it. > Since no one has objected and this series hasn't been applied yet, I guess I'll just go ahead and send out a new series which includes the renaming to stable. - Eric