Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-82801-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240226104653.54877-1-lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> <87o7c3mlwb.fsf@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <87o7c3mlwb.fsf@intel.com>
From: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 08:28:10 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKXUXMz-aTN3qrOmacWT_12awUT4wYTH8sr7SEc4B6XiYtz-BA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: submit-checklist: structure by category
To: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, 
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Jani,

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 1:48=E2=80=AFPM Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@intel.com>=
 wrote:
>
> On Mon, 26 Feb 2024, Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst b/Documentation=
/process/submit-checklist.rst
> > index b1bc2d37bd0a..7d8dba942fe8 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst
> > @@ -11,110 +11,121 @@ These are all above and beyond the documentation =
that is provided in
> >  and elsewhere regarding submitting Linux kernel patches.
> >
> >
> > +*Review your code:*
>
> If you're adding subheadings, maybe consider making them actual
> subheadings instead of just italicizing them.
>
> The top heading should probably be modified to follow the guidelines in
> Documentation/doc-guide/sphinx.rst. This should be a separate change.
>

I have done that. In my humble personal opinion, at the moment, the
subheadings look a bit too large in the HTML view compared to the few
points below.
However, I am planning to add more points to the checklist anyway when
I understand and have summarized the essence of the other documents
for patch submissions (submitting-patches and howto).

So, let us make them subheadings.

> > +
> >  1) If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
> >     that facility.  Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones
> >     that you use.
> >
> > -2) Builds cleanly:
> > +2) Check your patch for general style as detailed in
> > +   :ref:`Documentation/process/coding-style.rst <codingstyle>`.
> >
> > -  a) with applicable or modified ``CONFIG`` options ``=3Dy``, ``=3Dm``=
, and
> > -     ``=3Dn``.  No ``gcc`` warnings/errors, no linker warnings/errors.
> > +3) All memory barriers {e.g., ``barrier()``, ``rmb()``, ``wmb()``} nee=
d a
> > +   comment in the source code that explains the logic of what they are=
 doing
> > +   and why.
>
> I think we should just remove all the manually updated bullet
> numbering. Either make them bulleted lists with "*" or autonumbered
> lists with "#.". See [1]. This should be a separate change.
>

Done that. I used "#." to still have the numbering in place.

The two changes are straightforward, and I will send them out as a v2
series, once Randy has had time to provide his feedback on the content
of the v1 patch and I have included his review remarks.


Lukas