From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sender4-op-o12.zoho.com (sender4-op-o12.zoho.com [136.143.188.12]) (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 2CB123A4537; Sat, 4 Apr 2026 08:13:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=136.143.188.12 ARC-Seal:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775290436; cv=pass; b=S+Qt3uf8iOZa+KnMtdrFZl3al/peTb+pe0jK6fswJdpRvkI6x2bfoM241vVoWqpO4mdVtlTYdGIEOldjdaYWG28RvoD5EJFTsocWgh+WWrWsIZWsR3TUJQKhp+nKPnRYV17I8GNi1AQEjFBTOM8buy9ZqKWtv7cvTcpz3jVxXWM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=2; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775290436; c=relaxed/simple; bh=udKkH6QPVpJknoZVYE+0kn8vKKiQfrelqiZOgNk/iAI=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Cc:From:To:Subject: References:In-Reply-To; b=dXEAk/63trCJifj/7TCHei3XNx28/RfgJFzKvQK5Y8zG5eFETp3FfT2Bm009nTYUAXdDALnyu5bDyEodJ/xHaLkDmGN4w/hplawqr3zinsfjJRfLDF7+639bFJSulr22waRvMPUiS0ICYJj6cND6F3gUoAqeyAoSp9ieGkef5ZM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=2; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=ritovision.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ritovision.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ritovision.com header.i=rito@ritovision.com header.b=Pt3j20lO; arc=pass smtp.client-ip=136.143.188.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=ritovision.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ritovision.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ritovision.com header.i=rito@ritovision.com header.b="Pt3j20lO" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1775290424; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=e6FZs0VTTcXYsu4bQSmFoUEA8GMGjF1c5tB8auVBEIzC7MV/hjjhriJQnYsD8Er8SMnUQD6iPPXQabC7+fxPo9MKfYPuLA6Pv00et5PbXB3hwkorHhujobT0FWNUA4PjyrnGCgvwKzTvUQV/SuQnOKL48B2MJW3pdrrsmQE+sBo= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1775290424; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:From:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:Subject:To:To:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=udKkH6QPVpJknoZVYE+0kn8vKKiQfrelqiZOgNk/iAI=; b=N0NoAnrtzshVeJPxJtAgqfS+P/cZLaDA6a5JM84WxeHzWT+qCHjGqMoRJmiEBHNyfIdcVLRXbgT9Et79O9LHNd4DB0v1ieRxvSc0FzzcK4vRsxbjYRZVQWb12jINEDLmSENS/DvV/k0bkaCJkVn/IRZvzzAn6b+yMX7dBtp1j7A= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=ritovision.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rito@ritovision.com; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1775290424; s=zmail; d=ritovision.com; i=rito@ritovision.com; h=Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Date:Date:Message-Id:Message-Id:Cc:Cc:From:From:To:To:Subject:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Reply-To; bh=udKkH6QPVpJknoZVYE+0kn8vKKiQfrelqiZOgNk/iAI=; b=Pt3j20lOpGL90I5yUUug4aVYFlH1PGW0N+J6MR6DOrFSNbKW03/NzT1tK89elBjl 1NWlZfdYjB+Lj8OEP3KGbW9LTPO6bc5QA4anVItpMJyIoJHCURo7AFNpQywk3hUngBN SeggfT9OlEiqlboujNbyGlaiaIENijfgq6Ml4J8w= Received: by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1775290420678671.4533489626544; Sat, 4 Apr 2026 01:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2026 04:13:38 -0400 Message-Id: Cc: "Shuah Khan" , , From: "Rito Rhymes" To: "Rito Rhymes" , "Jonathan Corbet" , "Mauro Carvalho Chehab" , Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] docs: wrap generated tables to contain small-screen overflow X-Mailer: aerc 0.21.0 References: <20260321133811.17854-1-rito@ritovision.com> <20260323153723.34735-1-rito@ritovision.com> <87mrzvg2qx.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> In-Reply-To: X-ZohoMailClient: External Jon, Following up on this point: > So this CSS perhaps makes sense, but.. But why do you need to inject > another
, creating a whole new extension to do so, rather than > just applying the CSS directly to the elements? I just gave > that a try, and it would appear to work just fine. In my previous reply I outlined the regressions I saw when applying the CSS directly to the `
` elements, and why that led me to the wrapper-based approach instead. Given the regressions and rationale I already outlined, is the wrapper-based approach acceptable? Thanks, Rito