>>> What bug are you reporting? >> >> Examples: >> >> * Another typo >> “… contain only alphabets, …” >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/967d6fee-e0cd-c53f-c1f6-b367a979762c@xxxxxx/ >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/5/247 > > Legitimate but not critical. Thanks for such a view. It might be that less simple update candidates were left over now. >> * Use case explanation >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/f3c51b0a-2a55-6523-96e2-4f9ef0635d9f@xxxxxx/ >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/5/429 > > I believe what Masami has is sufficient. I got an other impression. An other document contains background information like the following. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/trace/boottime-trace.rst?id=b8381ce7aa8ef1ab5a79bf710508e504c494acf7 “… Since kernel command line is not enough to control these complex features, this uses bootconfig file to describe tracing feature programming. …” >> * Challenges for the safe application of key hierarchies >> “kernel.ftrace”? >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/c4a0bc10-a38b-6ea9-e125-7a37f667e61a@xxxxxx/ >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/2/28/363 > > Again, what Masami has is sufficient. I would appreciate further clarification also in this area. >> * Feature request for syntax description >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/2390b729-1b0b-26b5-66bc-92e40e3467b1@xxxxxx/ >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/2/27/1869 > > Masami's reply to you was sufficient. Yes (in principle). But I hope to achieve collateral evolution here, too. > Of your examples, only one do I see can be applied, but is just a minor > change in wording. I am trying again to resolve disagreements somehow. > I don't know where you are going with this, and unless you plan on > submitting patches, I think this document is complete as is. I hope also to influence the software development attention another bit. Regards, Markus
