Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs

2016-12-13 Thread Sumit Semwal
Thanks Jonathan! On 12 December 2016 at 01:14, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 18:35:42 +0100 > Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> > Here's a thought, though: how about if we slip in a little version of >> > dma-buf.rst now with a "coming soon, don't miss it!!" message? Then the >> > rest o

Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs

2016-12-11 Thread Jonathan Corbet
On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 18:35:42 +0100 Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Here's a thought, though: how about if we slip in a little version of > > dma-buf.rst now with a "coming soon, don't miss it!!" message? Then the > > rest of the set could go through your tree without touching > > driver-api/index.rst a

Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs

2016-12-11 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Sun, Dec 11, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:35:49 +0100 > Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> > It seems like just the sort of thing we want to be doing to pull the docs >> > together in a more rational way. >> >> Ok if we pull this in through gfx trees? Will miss 4.10

Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs

2016-12-11 Thread Jonathan Corbet
On Sun, 11 Dec 2016 13:35:49 +0100 Daniel Vetter wrote: > > It seems like just the sort of thing we want to be doing to pull the docs > > together in a more rational way. > > Ok if we pull this in through gfx trees? Will miss 4.10 though, that's > already finished and in bugfix-only mode. I'v

Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs

2016-12-11 Thread Daniel Vetter
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 19:53:04 +0100 > Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> Not yet everything in this area, I still want to sprinkle nice docs around >> all >> the fence code. Especially some text to explain implicit vs. explicit fencing >> and how i

Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs

2016-12-11 Thread Sumit Semwal
Hi Daniel, On 10 December 2016 at 02:45, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 19:53:04 +0100 > Daniel Vetter wrote: > >> Not yet everything in this area, I still want to sprinkle nice docs around >> all >> the fence code. Especially some text to explain implicit vs. explicit fencing >>

Re: [PATCH 0/5] sphinxification for dma-buf docs

2016-12-09 Thread Jonathan Corbet
On Fri, 9 Dec 2016 19:53:04 +0100 Daniel Vetter wrote: > Not yet everything in this area, I still want to sprinkle nice docs around all > the fence code. Especially some text to explain implicit vs. explicit fencing > and how it's all supposed to work. > > But just cleanup in the dma-buf part w