Hello Jon. On 27.02.19 21:18, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2019 20:59:12 +0100 > Stefan Schmidt <stefan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> The patches are based on net-next, but they only touch the networking book so I >> would not expect and trouble. From what I have seen they would go through >> Jonathan's tree after being acked by Dave? If you want this patches against a >> different tree let me know. > > Usually Dave takes networking documentation patches directly, so that is > what I would expect here. OK, so I got that wrong. Works for me. Dave, you want to take them directly, if nothing else comes up during review, or should I apply them to my tree and send them with the next pull request? > I took a quick look anyway; seems generally good. The main comment I > would make is that much of what's there would be better placed as > kerneldoc comments in the code itself that can then be pulled into the > formatted docs. But that can be a job for another day... Interesting point. That might be indeed a good idea on some parts of this sparse doc. Need to check how this is handled in other docs. It also needs extending scope and context, but again something for a follow up patchset. regards Stefan Schmidt
