Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel
Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system, so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the kernel tree wasn't even imagined. But now that has changed, so add the old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things around.)
This also will allow people to add their names to it, as I seem to have lost the ability to do that by not knowing how to edit things on the original document.
---
Jon, if this isn't the correct place to put the document, I'd be glad to move it elsewhere, I just picked the first place that it seemed to fit into.
Documentation/process/index.rst | 1 + Documentation/process/kernel-driver-statement.rst | 199 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 200 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/process/kernel-driver-statement.rst
Documentation/process/index.rst +1 -0
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ Below are the essential guides that every developer should read. submitting-patches coding-style email-clients + kernel-driver-statement Other guides to the community that are of interest to most developers are:
Documentation/process/kernel-driver-statement.rst new file +199 -0
199 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
2.14.2
Em Fri, 6 Oct 2017 11:10:38 +0200
Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> escreveu:
Quoted 7 lines
Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system, so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the kernel tree wasn't even imagined. But now that has changed, so add the old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things around.)
Quoted 7 lines
This also will allow people to add their names to it, as I seem to have lost the ability to do that by not knowing how to edit things on the original document.
Signed-off-by Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>From my side:
Thanks,
Mauro
Jonathan Corbet
maintainerQuoted 11 lines · On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 11:10:38 +0200 Greg Kroah-Hartman…
Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system, so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the kernel tree wasn't even imagined. But now that has changed, so add the old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things around.)
This also will allow people to add their names to it, as I seem to have lost the ability to do that by not knowing how to edit things on the original document.
Quoted 6 lines
Signed-off-by Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>---
Jon, if this isn't the correct place to put the document, I'd be glad to move it elsewhere, I just picked the first place that it seemed to fit into.
It seems like the perfect place to me, I went ahead and applied it.
Thanks,
jon
Quoted 6 lines · On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 11:10:38AM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system, so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the kernel tree wasn't even imagined. But now that has changed, so add the old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things around.)
Cool, I like it much to see it added to the kernel tree.
But could you explain what "robust" means in this context? And what has changed which makes it "robust"? Sphinx?
I am interested in how such documents are handled best.
Quoted 11 lines · Wolfram Sang
Quoted 6 lines · On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 11:10:38AM +0200, [email protected] wrote:
Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system, so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the kernel tree wasn't even imagined. But now that has changed, so add the old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things around.)
Cool, I like it much to see it added to the kernel tree.
But could you explain what "robust" means in this context?
We did not have a way to easily turn the files in Documentation/ into html and pdf docs like we now do. The documentation is now auto-generated and placed up on kernel.org here:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/
Quoted 1 line
And what has changed which makes it "robust"? Sphinx?
Yes, remember the mess we had before?
Not that sphinx doesn't have it's own issues, but you have to admit it is much better now than it used to be, right?
thanks,
greg k-h
Quoted 3 lines
Not that sphinx doesn't have it's own issues, but you have to admit it is much better now than it used to be, right?
That goes without saying, but we still added plain textfiles to Documentation/ since 2008, so I was wondering...
Quoted 6 lines · Wolfram Sang
Quoted 3 lines
Not that sphinx doesn't have it's own issues, but you have to admit it is much better now than it used to be, right?
That goes without saying, but we still added plain textfiles to
Documentation/since 2008, so I was wondering...
And really, all news one should be in correct markdown format, as it is almost identical to a "normal" text file. Heck, it really is just a "plain" textfile, you can read it as-such, right?
thanks,
greg k-h
Quoted 3 lines · On Sat, 14 Oct 2017, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>…
And really, all news one should be in correct markdown format, as it is almost identical to a "normal" text file. Heck, it really is just a "plain" textfile, you can read it as-such, right?
*cough* reStructuredText *cough*
BR,
Jani.
Signature · 1 line
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center