Sphinx reported unknown target warning:
Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst:329: WARNING: Unknown target name: "bpf".
The warning is caused by BPF type name prefix ("bpf_") which is written
without escaping the trailing underscore.
Escape the underscore to fix the warning. While at it, wrap the
containing paragraph in less than 80 characters.
Fixes: 9805af8d8a5b17 ("bpf: Document UAPI details for special BPF types")
Signed-off-by: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx>
---
Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst
index 4e4af398607b58..17e774d96c5e4b 100644
--- a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst
+++ b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst
@@ -326,11 +326,11 @@ size, type, and alignment, or any other user visible API or ABI detail across
kernel releases. The users must adapt their BPF programs to the new changes and
update them to make sure their programs continue to work correctly.
-NOTE: BPF subsystem specially reserves the 'bpf_' prefix for type names, in
+NOTE: BPF subsystem specially reserves the 'bpf\_' prefix for type names, in
order to introduce more special fields in the future. Hence, user programs must
-avoid defining types with 'bpf_' prefix to not be broken in future releases. In
-other words, no backwards compatibility is guaranteed if one using a type in BTF
-with 'bpf_' prefix.
+avoid defining types with 'bpf\_' prefix to not be broken in future releases.
+In other words, no backwards compatibility is guaranteed if one using a type
+in BTF with 'bpf\_' prefix.
Q: What is the compatibility story for special BPF types in local kptrs?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
base-commit: f71b2f64177a199d5b1d2047e155d45fd98f564a
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
