On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 11:36:43 +0000 Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > This fixues up the markup to fix a warning, be more consistent with > use of monospace, and use the correct .rst syntax for <em> (* instead > of _). It also clarifies the explanation of Clang's -mcpu > requirements for this feature, Alexei pointed out that use of the > word "version" was confusing here. This starts to sound like material for more than one patch...? > NB this conflicts with Lukas' patch at [1], here where I've added > `::` to fix the warning, I also kept the original ':' which appears > in the output text. And why did you do that? > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CA+i-1C3cEXqxcXfD4sibQfx+dtmmzvOzruhk8J5pAw3g5v=KgA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t > > Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/networking/filter.rst | 30 +++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/networking/filter.rst b/Documentation/networking/filter.rst > index f6d8f90e9a56..ba03e90a9163 100644 > --- a/Documentation/networking/filter.rst > +++ b/Documentation/networking/filter.rst > @@ -1048,12 +1048,12 @@ Unlike classic BPF instruction set, eBPF has generic load/store operations:: > Where size is one of: BPF_B or BPF_H or BPF_W or BPF_DW. > > It also includes atomic operations, which use the immediate field for extra > -encoding. > +encoding: :: Things like this read really strangely. Just say "encoding::" and be done with it, please. Thanks, jon
