Re: [PATCH bpf-next] docs: bpf: Fixup atomics documentation

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 11:36:43 +0000
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This fixues up the markup to fix a warning, be more consistent with
> use of monospace, and use the correct .rst syntax for <em> (* instead
> of _). It also clarifies the explanation of Clang's -mcpu
> requirements for this feature, Alexei pointed out that use of the
> word "version" was confusing here.

This starts to sound like material for more than one patch...?

> NB this conflicts with Lukas' patch at [1], here where I've added
> `::` to fix the warning, I also kept the original ':' which appears
> in the output text.

And why did you do that?  

> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CA+i-1C3cEXqxcXfD4sibQfx+dtmmzvOzruhk8J5pAw3g5v=KgA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
> 
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/networking/filter.rst | 30 +++++++++++++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/networking/filter.rst b/Documentation/networking/filter.rst
> index f6d8f90e9a56..ba03e90a9163 100644
> --- a/Documentation/networking/filter.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/networking/filter.rst
> @@ -1048,12 +1048,12 @@ Unlike classic BPF instruction set, eBPF has generic load/store operations::
>  Where size is one of: BPF_B or BPF_H or BPF_W or BPF_DW.
>  
>  It also includes atomic operations, which use the immediate field for extra
> -encoding.
> +encoding: ::

Things like this read really strangely.  Just say "encoding::" and be done
with it, please.

Thanks,

jon