From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Corbet Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 14:15:14 -0700 Message-ID: <20161209141514.505b018f@lwn.net> References: <20161209185309.1682-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20161209185309.1682-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Vetter Cc: DRI Development , Intel Graphics Development , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 19:53:04 +0100 Daniel Vetter wrote: > Not yet everything in this area, I still want to sprinkle nice docs around all > the fence code. Especially some text to explain implicit vs. explicit fencing > and how it's all supposed to work. > > But just cleanup in the dma-buf part was quite a bit of work, and I'd like to > get feedback on that before moving on. No complaints here - except that I had to go looking around to find this 0/5 posting explaining what the overall goal was...:) It seems like just the sort of thing we want to be doing to pull the docs together in a more rational way. jon