Re: Generic kernel features that need architecture(mips) support

On 06/10/2015 04:58 PM, Ralf Baechle wrote:

How are the documentation files in Documentation/features/ maintained?
They were automatically generated so I wonder if I have to take care
of anything.

CC: Ingo and related ml.

(Jon Cc:-ed)

* Xose Vazquez Perez [off-list ref] wrote:

On 06/10/2015 04:58 PM, Ralf Baechle wrote:

quoted

How are the documentation files in Documentation/features/ maintained?
They were automatically generated so I wonder if I have to take care
of anything.

CC: Ingo and related ml.

So changes to Documentation/features/ should come as simple patches done from hand 
editing, there's no need to preserve any initial (half-)automated generation. 
Formatting should be preserved so that Documentation/features/list-arch.sh still 
works as before.

Jon: would you like to receive all patches to Documentation/features/ so you can 
collect them in the documentation tree, or can maintainers patch it as part of any 
feature work that affects the tables? I think it's all finegrained enough to not 
create conflicts. That way they would become partly self-maintaining. (Or at least 
one can always hope! ;-)

Thanks,

	Ingo

On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:24:53 +0200
Ingo Molnar [off-list ref] wrote:

Jon: would you like to receive all patches to Documentation/features/ so you can 
collect them in the documentation tree, or can maintainers patch it as part of any 
feature work that affects the tables? I think it's all finegrained enough to not 
create conflicts. That way they would become partly self-maintaining. (Or at least 
one can always hope! ;-)

I sort of figured I'd handle it the way I do the rest of Documentation/ —
I'm happy to herd the patches, but I also have no problem staying out of
the way when other maintainers reach into it.

jon