From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70B4E7262F; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 22:14:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755814456; cv=none; b=UCiwR6QCnkGtZoO45s/zybau7so2cR2eSZmsWF8KnYda3J4d7CbNvnAHqPwX0WKrW2t21CFa/EO4RKGwv2OeQU6xnn/sVfkh9VTChto4JPRziZqSyJADit0gMzquHRqF+4gWrqvyEaYoBAfU5+82ORPrUTFqgodUuzkhZKRT50s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755814456; c=relaxed/simple; bh=S+Trtko+0wRKZhE6JSWDniCh6IfrnPbrR3w4hXx+v6w=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=UwcWzKXIDXjwy8hL/ez2Usebt+t7ay+shSfKv97RngyOk9BXa4YIgWCoKzwRYEkaaAMNqin2nTQpcQs1S+Y9DWFcvYXmVeXCWl3HjTltklR+avd1SvNmKBTWnuTVtUQkEOoYgtmybyXqxljs4+cgtE870RqlpjOcah9L7AZEjsY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=h3P4Sl4U; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="h3P4Sl4U" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 53AC540AE2 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1755814454; bh=Mi8nBCWTguqPRir2kyPNhtQ3kf1zAQLHtOjWErpNaMw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=h3P4Sl4UvlEg5OiJabnH7iF1K4tXUnOeHA1vrIX3dGBFsZqf1IZwfkpzOogYNUmKY fnVVMk3aKcgP1ve9imHvnbsifWaOMFiDinlE8J1Vcc5my1JhcOM8goZgp/Yhx5IQZE M9qW+Ym0d0yiBX1n0yp3u4CydG8sTg/ejzF4kXhS6TXsiHtz7EM95WfmItvyCVclnL phSKGKXAEY8AGOxTzVX+qslBCPM+g4xWSJfJh54lPEuOXR0VUq/y5K8pe1v8UXf6iM 5qjFU396HS3t181C9ibg8ONt/JkzUJqWYKzwz2V61+F+R8mOz0xd4LJPrtShD23ngO 3JulSAeCmVKwg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:2da9::824]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53AC540AE2; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 22:14:14 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: paulmck@kernel.org Cc: Nikil Paul S , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] docs: rcu: Replace multiple dead OLS links in RTFP.txt In-Reply-To: <972cf9c8-f8a6-4a5a-90a4-696f9a4e0f6d@paulmck-laptop> References: <20250819180545.3561-2-snikilpaul@gmail.com> <87h5y07e6y.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <972cf9c8-f8a6-4a5a-90a4-696f9a4e0f6d@paulmck-laptop> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 16:14:13 -0600 Message-ID: <877bywqq4q.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Paul E. McKenney" writes: > On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 11:54:45AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: >> Nikil Paul S writes: >> >> > This patch updates several dead OLS links in RTFP.txt, replacing them >> > with working copies hosted on kernel.org. >> > >> > Originally posted as part of a 2-patch series, this is now being sent >> > as a standalone v4 patch to avoid confusion. >> > >> > Changes since v3: >> > - No change in content, only resubmitted as a single patch instead of >> > "2/2" from the earlier series. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Nikil Paul S >> > --- >> > Documentation/RCU/RTFP.txt | 6 +++--- >> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> So this looks good to me, but it should really be run past the RCU folks >> (and Paul in particular) as well; adding him to the CC. > > I queued this and checked it and it looks good. By default, I would > send this during the upcoming merge window. But if you would rather > take it: > > Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney > > Either way, let me know! It's all yours. Thanks, jon