From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95E97C4742C for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:26:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39C652224B for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:26:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="d2opNbbD" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726184AbgKMK0j (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 05:26:39 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48458 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726176AbgKMK0j (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 05:26:39 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x435.google.com (mail-wr1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::435]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCD49C0613D1 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:26:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x435.google.com with SMTP id j7so9206437wrp.3 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:26:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FwGxGLgHCO+++Xi/GWLlqeBd8X2nV/+YugaoLwzhE9A=; b=d2opNbbD9NtQqnIxlktr/oU5+D5toQ0zRnTEY84DxnRHs94SWS0NELpFUblEIR2G+v PsGvIDpX9mAyC4/QZwTJBperFVzu6zMuEpkLXlOoPFztNMCljcAp3Kt6Mr/q8mUuv68X gc0O9IyAuTwV3zTqPAT34OGsZAqaWyWEJEMiWM6P/HAU1IGMhpcBYt7wJv4kQHREpH/S VfKH4Xvdosxa3UYNnJo7NjF+PDUBadPRlhT1+9XCd7aHnaqyr7iXx5zfHCuW73S7C0CE luAieHT+ysJ9rcI8IHgfkMvjx0qihUJJwoLYRXRVi4WWqnfvdUxGxMKTkzYxFb+NfUnz MarA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FwGxGLgHCO+++Xi/GWLlqeBd8X2nV/+YugaoLwzhE9A=; b=LPYK5FqoAhhLLrtpHyyXgG+TEQchhoUM45+LsF13+xyRS7e5kWCberqA+qmeIYoT8G dO5x1U8XpBAZuqk5klNzvNH1dpgQNv0pOG65rE12HIuUiqUlJMDAoG6GSWNWZiDZ983h A/slbA1SjgSYyio+oXq9cOBtk+XgoXQ+UTVYrIIotjnOodxUaIToqmEN0UNW4s6nUYe7 CeOfTqpXZpNwBa/IHgic+IxQXDarqQEluApZNvuwMHfB0zY6jDi/JvWQxtSTvimYwLPU ng/hlsvSfWD7AmHTnHseb/Vr5Jt+PDZ8U7JPLlAgI+dpD8lIxEJ8B0rSCNOLQ49rEREl HbCA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532w4xvvpacEafBlrhmt6nZSJjPKdnNLZEM0/27RglN507iKWLgQ h2otHppEDsoKRIxvctQP/HqFyqDf8zxsYQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxEmf7aDuKTukFT+MXohxRpMBVXNQzSWaWsS45QVnE7GT3u77zfaqas6iAZ/QV/WzudUQ8EIQ== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5643:: with SMTP id j3mr2453692wrw.43.1605263197264; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:26:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.143] ([170.253.51.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s12sm9623887wmc.6.2020.11.13.02.26.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 02:26:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [RFC v1] perf_event_open.2: srcfix + ffix To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" , Alejandro Colomar Cc: "G . Branden Robinson" , linux-man@vger.kernel.org References: <20201112225528.99397-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <84882898-6208-73cc-cb52-1e1663d025e1@gmail.com> From: Alejandro Colomar Message-ID: Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 11:26:35 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <84882898-6208-73cc-cb52-1e1663d025e1@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Hi Michael, On 11/13/20 10:21 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: [...] > >> @@ -1800,12 +1854,17 @@ by new. >> In overwrite mode, it might not be possible to infer where the >> new data began, and it is the consumer's job to disable >> measurement while reading to avoid possible data races. >> -.IP >> +.PP >> The >> -.IR aux_head " and " aux_tail >> +.I aux_head >> +and >> +.I aux_tail >> ring buffer pointers have the same behavior and ordering >> rules as the previous described >> -.IR data_head " and " data_tail . >> +.I data_head >> +and >> +.IR data_tail . >> +.RE >> .PP >> The following 2^n ring-buffer pages have the layout described below. >> .PP >> @@ -1845,15 +1904,15 @@ the fields with shorter descriptions are presented first. >> This indicates the size of the record. >> .TP >> .I misc >> +.RS >> The >> .I misc >> field contains additional information about the sample. > > This renders as: > > size This indicates the size of the record. > > misc > The misc field contains additional information about the > sample. > > The CPU mode can be determined from this value by masking > with PERF_RECORD_MISC_CPUMODE_MASK and looking for one of > the following (note these are not bit masks, only one can > be set at a time): > > This is anomalous. We have a newline after "misc", but not after "size", > because of the proposal that we add ".RS/.RE" only in .TP blocks > with multiple paragraphs. Yes, that's a bit inconsistent... > > Whats the alternative? I guess we could *always* use .RS/.RE even inside > .TP blocks that have only one paragraph, but: > > * That's even more markup > * We end up with even more white space in the rendered output. > * We almost certainly *don't* want to do this for .TP lists > that consist of multiple items where each list item is a > rendered paragraph that is juust a line or two. [1] Right. > > [...] > > At this point, I feel we are devoting a lot of energy to solving a > problem that has no really good solution. The status quo is not ideal, > but so far I'm not convinced that there's any compellingly better > alternative. And moving to one of those alternatives will require > changes in a lot of pages. I'm in favor of staying with the status quo. Agreed. > > Thanks, > > Michael > > [1] > I mean, I think this: > > [[ > HEAD item text > > HEAD item text > > HEAD item text > ]] > > is preferable to this: > > [[ > HEAD > item text > > HEAD > item text > > HEAD > item text > > HEAD > item text > > ]] Completely agree. Cheers, Alex