From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: Generic kernel features that need architecture(mips) support Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:24:53 +0200 Message-ID: <20150611062452.GB32133@gmail.com> References: <55759543.1010408@gmail.com> <20150610145804.GG2753@linux-mips.org> <5578679D.2030307@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:38837 "EHLO mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750931AbbFKGY7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2015 02:24:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5578679D.2030307@gmail.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Xose Vazquez Perez , Jonathan Corbet Cc: Ralf Baechle , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, LKML (Jon Cc:-ed) * Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: > 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. 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