From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) (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 68FA826D4C6; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 23:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751672618; cv=none; b=k1VYg2S5XAlFjOJfOm3ntTqQ6XhHdf82lEOcfALVbwrlXvta4o2K8+LlZjgUFzzT3JVNum7RScEmB5fjicc3Xhfy16T3n0ic4vohYqeEWTPsqkNYOS9vdC+GFfSfbnuGfGjVjjuJg91IfEFLN3wGOg6r8OyCF6AuesRONIll1GE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751672618; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ynNo1Z4lyyh6Xq3Mw8cGMe5YNA9OWQ0njpEepLshJxM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Zz1EdONeOY+cu0Ai7z23ANRBXiosW2fWnnplbehlXON9JhMe4qlJ6XTbUxQpqguxgKEC9ndAzVZTU4zRjcRTPRdTXdFhDkyvNPM8aF5oI6bCl8sJo/itlBCo38ay/QE7rgiJfOFdvixns8WtYu5TE8ezDtBgO2Jgi+XXsMyWafQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=gqm3tahu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.50.34 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="gqm3tahu" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=C6HJ8IcGtBRiubKjaCXVhjsl7fuFELcIKXF72SPTkqQ=; b=gqm3tahumcaChgcx7QDFVmUJvJ KKMr79ur1vJTD9agV0AdSDOuzLZ/tbd3SQ4q+MS9MrbVaLAHYHzxVtU+DS/ZA/27EOs2enqJws+Wz qK13vj/V/hxtKeNv5bhnczcR+tSx6b0cx94RnLDbwgU6GvH45g0XTnrlgwxNhcFp0R94Uor9XyL59 Obwza+stWXW+CGjpAcVe9NPjw2NMrph6c6kUws3bQ0NUfNe63YZ68NUsf//f4rJ+UIQKrr0ur5KJ9 18qf6UbxmNFuHJdUgXycYM5RhLBLq2qbQ6BiQ7QWdT1lBkf/Ue2+x/b7RmqK0Om65bKPQJe8IycDV TSGbcB9w==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uXq3q-000000019v0-1vIH; Fri, 04 Jul 2025 23:43:18 +0000 Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2025 00:43:18 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Bagas Sanjaya Cc: Jonathan Corbet , John Groves , Dan Williams , Miklos Szeredi , Bernd Schubert , John Groves , Vishal Verma , Dave Jiang , Jan Kara , Alexander Viro , Christian Brauner , "Darrick J . Wong" , Randy Dunlap , Jeff Layton , Kent Overstreet , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Amir Goldstein , Jonathan Cameron , Stefan Hajnoczi , Joanne Koong , Josef Bacik , Aravind Ramesh , Ajay Joshi Subject: Re: [RFC V2 18/18] famfs_fuse: Add documentation Message-ID: References: <20250703185032.46568-1-john@groves.net> <20250703185032.46568-19-john@groves.net> <87ecuwk83h.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; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Sat, Jul 05, 2025 at 06:29:03AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > On Fri, Jul 04, 2025 at 07:58:28PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 04, 2025 at 10:53:23AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 03, 2025 at 08:22:58PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > > > Bagas. Stop. > > > > > > > > John has written documentation, that is great. Do not add needless > > > > friction to this process. Seriously. > > > > > > > > Why do I have to keep telling you this? > > > > > > Cause I'm more of perfectionist (detail-oriented)... > > > > Reviews aren't about you. They're about producing a better patch. > > Do your reviews produce better patches or do they make the perfect the > > enemy of the good? > > I'm looking for any Sphinx warnings, but if there's none, I check for > better wording or improving the docs output. That's appreciated. Really. But what you should be looking for is unclear or misleading wording. Not "this should be 'may' instead of 'might'". The review you give is often closer to nitpicking than serious review.