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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A38E0C4167E for ; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 05:09:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232334AbiC2FKp (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:10:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56896 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232272AbiC2FKm (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:10:42 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2476663EE; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9FBE61457; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 05:08:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C4187C2BBE4; Tue, 29 Mar 2022 05:08:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1648530530; bh=08ux/e+of7YhNHiCKUrgXeJoOl8a/LFyGxn1O4svJGM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=pvXvOzamoGNWrVV2bIHHKv9n4CsWW2IS7Io+p9H+/1jXlEam/5WZrNIgsQ+s17qfu 5D/1enImAm9p4z8HhYXcamWgnzC+zrPqPsmOX9rl+zL6Mh+HwE7sfWZIEPiWNcGWhy jcrLUk3oaY6GntS/owkpjlJHxvfIjzdB3OwNw78l7JzESe8r6VxFWw1gZc3gsudmAT d+mfayg+1JOMurhzp8TVhq5juh4I8bHO2GEfriRIdPpKJGzScPfhKQ3+84pn0MTv8G 4LwOJYorz1lj4qcw8LbpVSC7VvgnUv98skaNi3Di73REluQq1veyJcYxIbXNHSOcM6 uLZuLqVC2Dmlw== From: Jakub Kicinski To: davem@davemloft.net Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, andrew@lunn.ch, f.fainelli@gmail.com, Jakub Kicinski Subject: [PATCH net v2 11/14] docs: netdev: add missing back ticks Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:08:27 -0700 Message-Id: <20220329050830.2755213-12-kuba@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20220329050830.2755213-1-kuba@kernel.org> References: <20220329050830.2755213-1-kuba@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org I think double back ticks are more correct. Add where they are missing. Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski --- Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst index 1388f78cfbc5..294ad9b0162d 100644 --- a/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst +++ b/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst @@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ or the user space project is not reviewed on netdev include a link to a public repo where user space patches can be seen. In case user space tooling lives in a separate repository but is -reviewed on netdev (e.g. patches to `iproute2` tools) kernel and +reviewed on netdev (e.g. patches to ``iproute2`` tools) kernel and user space patches should form separate series (threads) when posted to the mailing list, e.g.:: @@ -251,18 +251,18 @@ traffic if we can help it. netdevsim is great, can I extend it for my out-of-tree tests? ------------------------------------------------------------- -No, `netdevsim` is a test vehicle solely for upstream tests. -(Please add your tests under tools/testing/selftests/.) +No, ``netdevsim`` is a test vehicle solely for upstream tests. +(Please add your tests under ``tools/testing/selftests/``.) -We also give no guarantees that `netdevsim` won't change in the future +We also give no guarantees that ``netdevsim`` won't change in the future in a way which would break what would normally be considered uAPI. Is netdevsim considered a "user" of an API? ------------------------------------------- Linux kernel has a long standing rule that no API should be added unless -it has a real, in-tree user. Mock-ups and tests based on `netdevsim` are -strongly encouraged when adding new APIs, but `netdevsim` in itself +it has a real, in-tree user. Mock-ups and tests based on ``netdevsim`` are +strongly encouraged when adding new APIs, but ``netdevsim`` in itself is **not** considered a use case/user. Any other tips to help ensure my net/net-next patch gets OK'd? -- 2.34.1