Hi Jon,

Thanks for quick response!

ÔÚ 2019/7/13 ÉÏÎç1:34, Jonathan Corbet дµÀ:

On Fri, 12 Jul 2019 10:20:07 +0800
Alex Shi [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

There are many different archs in Documentation/ dir, it's better to
move them together in 'Documentation/arch' which follows from kernel source.

So this seems certain to collide badly with Mauro's RST-conversion monster
patch set.

I don't mean that, sorry, and we can figure out if both of them are worthy to be picked up.

More to the point, though...if we are going to thrash up things this
badly, we want to be sure that we're doing it right so we don't end up
renaming everything again.  Grouping stuff into a new arch/ subdirectory
adds a bit of order, but it doesn't do much toward trying to organize our
documentation for its readers, and it doesn't help us to modernize the
docs and get rid of the old, useless stuff.  A quick check shows that many
of these files have seen no changes other than typo fixes since the
beginning of the Git era.

Right, there is some docs which need to be update or even drop, and a reorder would be a timing to push each of arch maintainer to do something, isn't it? Anyway, reordering  documents like kernel source dir could be one of choices. :)

So, in my mind, this needs some thought.  Maybe we want a
Documentation/arch in the end, but I'm not convinced that we should just
create it and fill it with a snow shovel.  This might be a good thing to
discuss at the kernel summit in September.

Thanks for considering, anyway, it could be a good start to get hands dirty whether the arch dir is needed. 

Thanks
Alex