From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 970C818C342; Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:27:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730748449; cv=none; b=W6JNgerrAHHiwQ5Ob4z/vnPK2ZLA7Tk+XOEGCxTzc4/lsucofqQ77eslhl9Xjh0uTdNxnFkI5wasXQoktdRqt0yLsWqXyCvXWElNa6/XNaohsib1VWMZIUVQhXzqvV1s2z6wryQIuo6Z6pRiPNCpda5yUnqPONuMcRhgV7ibmSU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730748449; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5ahiCxIeZ7Zrt1cRCp5O4yGFLwbtDrlU6FhUnRAbct8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=gwNlCqKGyC0Hj9X4Ld9Iu7NRvkwYD5XxZT1zHWKOyfekxWgnHG5WArTqaDsPp7turOXI6NOEqjGudWb5rWeXF3bha5lTAqJCqW4jyFSaNUDQtX8U/VYMAriZJFXKyhGMqmJfsS5ql22zl8EocMB9DpUPQQHfAY9Ix/r50DYeC94= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=klx0eLPS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="klx0eLPS" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net B0B1242C30 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1730748446; bh=MHJe88wvtxmCRW4ig638nW8IyXo/qVPt9CcKtlrPNmk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=klx0eLPSMwaoBnjz9CLwEYI3z7WCAB93gg4Niq8lpCA2We7OMAqwIH3BJnURQgp/B HNHq/Hotc/1FSWgVk0RBDJx93ap0TEmHaQmv//p663DWHIGDDnyP10vkfB/XS0pznZ 6p3wgL1gGlAYbVuhTzgjmvjigjxLQ/ruT5RdQ8eTTXCcMa7Y9TAyevozZxooZPTCTI I4KYEusl72ACasNjAHg11ig8DlbiVTN9UR3iyz8X0p6RPER/Dv6lrYyJ2AxD3bMURF CneFXoroeK7NJX+D1cG5YKTrvvtZM5CdrbB5lCFvLfrCbRN8rhDYJQeoXywmx+aQv2 CQ5V5C3DdmPbg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:5e00:625::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B0B1242C30; Mon, 4 Nov 2024 19:27:26 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: xu.xin16@zte.com.cn, alexs@kernel.org, si.yanteng@linux.dev, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mudongliangabcd@gmail.com, seakeel@gmail.com Cc: wang.yaxin@zte.com.cn, fan.yu9@zte.com.cn, xu.xin16@zte.com.cn, he.peilin@zte.com.cn, tu.qiang35@zte.com.cn, qiu.yutan@zte.com.cn, zhang.yunkai@zte.com.cn Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v8 RESEND] Docs/zh_CN: Translate physical_memory.rst to Simplified Chinese In-Reply-To: <20241028135321916ZWK032bHhlbncjvmzDkZs@zte.com.cn> References: <20241028135321916ZWK032bHhlbncjvmzDkZs@zte.com.cn> Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2024 12:27:25 -0700 Message-ID: <87ikt294v6.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain OK, I have applied this patch. A couple of comments for future reference: writes: > From: Yaxin Wang > > This patch translates the "physical_memory.rst" document into > Simplified Chinese to improve accessibility for Chinese-speaking > developers and users. Our documentation requests that patch changelogs be phrased in the imperative tense and avoid terms like "this patch". Some maintainers are quite insistent about that; I'm not one of them, but it is better to follow that guidance. > The translation was done with attention to technical accuracy > and readability, ensuring that the document remains informative > and useful in its translated form. This is not helpful in a changelog; if you have not paid such attention, you should not be submitting the patch in the first place. Comments like this can go after the "---" line if you really need to include them. > Update to commit 7332f9e45d2e("docs/mm: Physical Memory: Fix grammar") ...and this I don't understand at all; why do you need to reference that patch here? Thanks, jon