Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf/docs: Update design QA to be consistent with kfunc lifecycle docs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



David Vernet <void@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 02:57:30PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Cong pointed out that there are some inconsistencies between the BPF design
>> QA and the lifecycle expectations documentation we added for kfuncs. Let's
>> update the QA file to be consistent with the kfunc docs, and add references
>> where it makes sense. Also document that modules may export kfuncs now.
>> 
>> v2:
>> - Fix repeated word (s/defined defined/defined/)
>> 
>> Reported-by: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for fixing this. LGTM modulo one small grammar nit.
>
> Acked-by: David Vernet <void@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks! Will fix and respin :)

-Toke





[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux