From patchwork Wed Apr 14 11:20:32 2021 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Tiezhu Yang X-Patchwork-Id: 12202357 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net 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=-16.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham 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 4D19BC433B4 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 11:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 131CC61249 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 11:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1348287AbhDNLVL (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:21:11 -0400 Received: from mail.loongson.cn ([114.242.206.163]:50682 "EHLO loongson.cn" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229886AbhDNLVL (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Apr 2021 07:21:11 -0400 Received: from linux.localdomain (unknown [113.200.148.30]) by mail.loongson.cn (Coremail) with SMTP id AQAAf9Dx3+8B0HZg8_MHAA--.897S2; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:20:33 +0800 (CST) From: Tiezhu Yang To: Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Xuefeng Li Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf: Fix some invalid links in bpf_devel_QA.rst Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 19:20:32 +0800 Message-Id: <1618399232-17858-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.1.0 X-CM-TRANSID: AQAAf9Dx3+8B0HZg8_MHAA--.897S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoWxXrWUKrWfJr1fWF1xtF1DWrg_yoWrZF1Upa 1fGrnIkr18XF13Wwn7GrWUurySqas3GayUCF18Jr95Zw1jvryktr1IgrWfXa98Gr909ay3 Za4SkryYka18ZrDanT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUvE14x267AKxVW8JVW5JwAFc2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0 rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14AKwVWUJVWUGwA2ocxC64kIII0Yj41l84x0c7CEw4AK67xGY2AK02 1l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvE14v26r1I6r4UM28EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26F4j 6r4UJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26rxl6s0DM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVCY1x0267AKxVW0oV Cq3wAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc02F40EFcxC0VAKzVAqx4xG6I80ewAv7VC0 I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUGVWUXwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Gr0_Cr1lOx8S6xCaFVCjc4AY6r1j6r 4UM4x0Y48IcxkI7VAKI48JM4x0x7Aq67IIx4CEVc8vx2IErcIFxwACI402YVCY1x02628v n2kIc2xKxwCY02Avz4vE14v_Gw4l42xK82IYc2Ij64vIr41l4I8I3I0E4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr 0_Gr1lx2IqxVAqx4xG67AKxVWUJVWUGwC20s026x8GjcxK67AKxVWUGVWUWwC2zVAF1VAY 17CE14v26r1q6r43MIIYrxkI7VAKI48JMIIF0xvE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcV C0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26r4j6F4UMIIF0xvE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrJr0_WFyUJwCI 42IY6I8E87Iv67AKxVWUJVW8JwCI42IY6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26r4j6r4UJbIYCTnIWI evJa73UjIFyTuYvjfU589NDUUUU X-CM-SenderInfo: p1dqw3xlh2x3gn0dqz5rrqw2lrqou0/ Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net There exist some errors "404 Not Found" when I click the link of "MAINTAINERS" [1], "samples/bpf/" [2] and "selftests" [3] in the documentation "HOWTO interact with BPF subsystem" [4]. Use correct link of "MAINTAINERS" and just remove the links of "samples/bpf/" and "selftests" because there are no related documentations. [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/MAINTAINERS [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/samples/bpf/ [3] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ [4] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.html Fixes: 542228384888 ("bpf, doc: convert bpf_devel_QA.rst to use RST formatting") Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang --- v2: Add Fixes: tag Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst | 23 ++++++++++------------- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst index 2ed89ab..4fd4c8c 100644 --- a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst +++ b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.rst @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ list: This may also include issues related to XDP, BPF tracing, etc. Given netdev has a high volume of traffic, please also add the BPF -maintainers to Cc (from kernel MAINTAINERS_ file): +maintainers to Cc (from kernel :ref:`MAINTAINERS ` file): * Alexei Starovoitov * Daniel Borkmann @@ -217,11 +217,11 @@ page run by David S. Miller on net-next that provides guidance: Q: Verifier changes and test cases ---------------------------------- Q: I made a BPF verifier change, do I need to add test cases for -BPF kernel selftests_? +BPF kernel selftests? A: If the patch has changes to the behavior of the verifier, then yes, it is absolutely necessary to add test cases to the BPF kernel -selftests_ suite. If they are not present and we think they are +selftests suite. If they are not present and we think they are needed, then we might ask for them before accepting any changes. In particular, test_verifier.c is tracking a high number of BPF test @@ -234,11 +234,11 @@ be subject to change. Q: samples/bpf preference vs selftests? --------------------------------------- -Q: When should I add code to `samples/bpf/`_ and when to BPF kernel -selftests_ ? +Q: When should I add code to ``samples/bpf/`` and when to BPF kernel +selftests? -A: In general, we prefer additions to BPF kernel selftests_ rather than -`samples/bpf/`_. The rationale is very simple: kernel selftests are +A: In general, we prefer additions to BPF kernel selftests rather than +``samples/bpf/``. The rationale is very simple: kernel selftests are regularly run by various bots to test for kernel regressions. The more test cases we add to BPF selftests, the better the coverage @@ -246,9 +246,9 @@ and the less likely it is that those could accidentally break. It is not that BPF kernel selftests cannot demo how a specific feature can be used. -That said, `samples/bpf/`_ may be a good place for people to get started, +That said, ``samples/bpf/`` may be a good place for people to get started, so it might be advisable that simple demos of features could go into -`samples/bpf/`_, but advanced functional and corner-case testing rather +``samples/bpf/``, but advanced functional and corner-case testing rather into kernel selftests. If your sample looks like a test case, then go for BPF kernel selftests @@ -413,7 +413,7 @@ Testing patches Q: How to run BPF selftests --------------------------- A: After you have booted into the newly compiled kernel, navigate to -the BPF selftests_ suite in order to test BPF functionality (current +the BPF selftests suite in order to test BPF functionality (current working directory points to the root of the cloned git tree):: $ cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ @@ -645,10 +645,7 @@ when: .. Links .. _Documentation/process/: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/ -.. _MAINTAINERS: ../../MAINTAINERS .. _netdev-FAQ: ../networking/netdev-FAQ.rst -.. _samples/bpf/: ../../samples/bpf/ -.. _selftests: ../../tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ .. _Documentation/dev-tools/kselftest.rst: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/kselftest.html .. _Documentation/bpf/btf.rst: btf.rst