Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 26 Sep 2022 11:45:52 +0200
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
To:     Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc:     Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH v3 27/37] docs: gpu: i915.rst: gt: add more
 kernel-doc markups
Message-ID: <20220926114552.5e00242a@coco.lan>
In-Reply-To: <YxsCJjdN0eJncD1a@intel.com>
References: <cover.1662708705.git.mchehab@kernel.org>
        <6d31414391976615b5c1818cafba066132c24e85.1662708705.git.mchehab@kernel.org>
        <YxsCJjdN0eJncD1a@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Em Fri, 9 Sep 2022 05:06:46 -0400
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> escreveu:

> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 09:34:34AM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > There are several documented GT kAPI that aren't currently part
> > of the docs. Add them, as this allows identifying issues with
> > badly-formatted tags.
> >  
> 
> In i915's commits we usually add a version history here
> to indicate what changed from the previous submission,
> something like
> 
> v2: re-organizing the blocks to group gtt stuff.

Placing patch versioning at the email's detailed explanation is
actually a violation of the Kernel coding style. See:

	https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#the-canonical-patch-format

	"The explanation body will be committed to the permanent source changelog, 
	 so should make sense to a competent reader who has long since forgotten 
	 the immediate details of the discussion that might have led to this patch."

Such versions should either go at the cover letter - which is the usual
convention on big series, or after "---", as explained at the same
document:

	"The --- marker line serves the essential purpose of marking for patch
	 handling tools where the changelog message ends.

	 ...

	Other comments relevant only to the moment or the maintainer, not suitable
	for the permanent changelog, should also go here. A good example of such 
	comments might be patch changelogs which describe what has changed between
	the v1 and v2 version of the patch."


> 
> that helps reviewers to know if their change requested was
> addressed or not.

True. Next time, I'll add a version at the cover letter.

> 
> but anyways:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>

Thank you!
Mauro