From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 E0CAB3DB644; Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:00:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777309238; cv=none; b=SwL1Jjx8fT+Tp/xf7WMNHvBItmCMq5vMQ2qev1JE8j+A1c8uESxDY3dDAzuccyJrAAeitU8CKOqZYnGGqU4YnAnuKW+d8qaUuML6cqkyIexFBqHeCsRJAqtUbsYxx7JIHGV0RDBE01lmdZ0qsSLa5qLyHWvgmOqQBpJfhGpWFBs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777309238; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YXXGHWsPBPRPEzaPrYolW+Wu4uuwei/TTKFDRMYj/Ck=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=uOvHM5uEmQNMzUhGhaqvoXzctsl2NVP68WZvALcVicsoB5EEeRYcMbtuvgioaohN6PEq3Cf7U1ZnYYBNYJ/e2ToxPrRN2lHvL+NJWaZI1I1ZJZrYp8eY+aC+9NczZgdBCM3ErXptSuQmJlekICAWrfix6Gp1+OD5lpFS9jpZQBw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (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=mabDjsyX; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (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="mabDjsyX" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=bADU0bpxGz43Tyth14UHuz1PQjWoIRpdpcDPh7Eb24A=; b=mabDjsyX3vcRhggS6ICSoTfB6j U813JKtVm65NQKjnQhPJioE4NoR2Dak48WiUCnopd+7KrMrhej9tfaqtDMKEiK2xx0DfWd9UdIqwp HmzCcRTqZhKxIA1z8QpM/BJhb8jQc+j34J1lzphhJteiq6cnkl/5PF4964O+PJD7PwA5Az3F2d8VP ABXnEbJ3xhAnQzedbh3cgTJHWAj/oH4Uy0aa0DSFmSeDppS55xOUbDelijWJtUFILhBYvgq27euzk bEvPEUqS7tgua1dQV/SDFnJyje3s2SjCfHympzkSoCdOybMKugZekMK52ZEBSlIVuhw9UpCeInZ4X 5RHY2U/A==; Received: from [50.53.43.113] (helo=[192.168.254.34]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wHPJw-0000000HOuS-12iK; Mon, 27 Apr 2026 17:00:32 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2026 10:00:30 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 v2] Documentation: proc: fix section numbering in table of contents To: Jonathan Corbet , Baolin Liu , skhan@linuxfoundation.org, cyphar@cyphar.com, vbabka@kernel.org, surenb@google.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Baolin Liu References: <20260424090654.19229-1-liubaolin12138@163.com> <87wlxspw1j.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Content-Language: en-US From: Randy Dunlap In-Reply-To: <87wlxspw1j.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 4/27/26 2:55 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Randy Dunlap writes: > >> On 4/24/26 2:06 AM, Baolin Liu wrote: >>> From: Baolin Liu >>> >>> Commit e24ccaaf7ec4 ("block: remove last remaining traces of IDE >>> documentation") removed the IDE section but left its table of >>> contents entry behind. >>> Fix the stale entry and renumber the following sections. >>> >>> Fixes: e24ccaaf7ec4 ("block: remove last remaining traces of IDE documentation") >>> Signed-off-by: Baolin Liu >> >> LGTM. >> Acked-by: Randy Dunlap >> >> I note that the html-generated TOC is already correct; >> e.g., https://docs.kernel.org/filesystems/proc.html#networking-info-in-proc-net >> is already section 1.3. > > There are advantages to having a computer do a job like that :) > > I do really question the value of these manually maintained TOCs; they > are always going to be out of date. But ... > >> AFAICT, this TOC is for users/readers who use an editor or pager >> to read this file, but the patch is useful in that setting. > > Others seem to disagree, so we keep them. > > I've applied the patch, thanks. Yes, others do disagree, but my comment was not meant to be an endorsement for keeping it there. I'm fine without it. -- ~Randy