From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 39CE61FBC8E; Tue, 9 Dec 2025 18:15:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765304131; cv=none; b=KTy5uA3l2Iy7MkqgdqKSZbiu4eynBUvWdLSYQoyJF4bktwCqeWrRVZyNV3hovF+5TQJlu3SsRQPh2cHS+6Y8yremW+/JMl7wS26IZLHezat39atatTsvMe408teemmOIyqwvDL0rSFA68t86fQa6javy5V7B+UP8LRbK/FI70LU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1765304131; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LH5+klOjVc76hTwA4TrNZMOqvVWC063/qhUHROKv1+c=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=S/zMBzDmolZAQjDF+YRInsUMC3tOjq9HXc4BK55+F4ENHvmyVqdrByT5GXYi1TOWMzz5iwUbpfuwAG2mK4i+kmspGRCr/AO3R8IBdaIWItBQZuSXWLI6x31eAUzz92j3mUin4lEG8JaSUYKBWM4lk/IXJnTAkKYBXkRmhSHeGLE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=qTGIHjXN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="qTGIHjXN" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=uN2sCqPF/oq2UMysh8J25QMZlJf+jrZOQd9WALtcvbw=; b=qTGIHjXNmU86U+qI1GrANFYMgu GrFyD9MS/F+1oGfbsn+S33HMDHr8uCttfdKT4fu8izk+SPjFetKdk7molwIh/b18pe4nxibRyHv/m 3Fz+nIX0WsofTZaA+RlR/nNzr1NSmZpDZ0fz5cubZ3wSfwwIljz0kZq0Y+jqJGgg9s4Hao1OdleuO Sae/eKfMjSefMnkBWv7i+Jyt33+vFIlng5YVQIKiLl8yVvXf32bJTbFRg9pYahoN8L4hRvvay6LWZ vhPAuLwZ1Rt+VLjgRzH6Q1rR9sYx7X30m2TzN0y6j0EFIlJUzSQURihn02QT8kv/xHjcqIa9fVNJl FKzu2yFQ==; Received: from [50.53.43.113] (helo=[192.168.254.34]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vT2F4-0000000Edqg-0jUA; Tue, 09 Dec 2025 18:15:18 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 10:15:14 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation: x86/boot: Fix malformed table in boot.rst To: Ingo Molnar , Swaraj Gaikwad Cc: bp@alien8.de, corbet@lwn.net, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, david.hunter.linux@gmail.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, skhan@linuxfoundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org, Bagas Sanjaya References: <20251208210113.24057-1-swarajgaikwad1925@gmail.com> <20251209085330.9124-1-swarajgaikwad1925@gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Randy Dunlap In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/9/25 12:53 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Swaraj Gaikwad wrote: > >> Sphinx reports htmldocs warnings: >> >> Documentation/arch/x86/boot.rst:437: ERROR: Malformed table. >> Text in column margin in table line 2. >> >> The table header defined the first column width as 2 characters ("=="), >> which is too narrow for entries like "0x10" and "0x13". This caused the >> text to spill into the margin, triggering a docutils parsing failure. >> >> Fix it by extending the first column of assigned boot loader ID to 4 >> characters ("====") to fit the widest entries. >> >> Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap >> Tested-by: Randy Dunlap >> Reviewed-by: Bagas Sanjaya >> Signed-off-by: Swaraj Gaikwad >> --- >> Changes in v2: >> - Dropped accidental whitespace changes (the second chunk in v1). >> - Simplified commit message as suggested by Bagas Sanjaya. >> >> --- >> Documentation/arch/x86/boot.rst | 48 ++++++++++++++++----------------- >> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/arch/x86/boot.rst b/Documentation/arch/x86/boot.rst >> index 6d36ce86fd8e..89e785850f7e 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/arch/x86/boot.rst >> +++ b/Documentation/arch/x86/boot.rst >> @@ -433,30 +433,30 @@ Protocol: 2.00+ >> >> Assigned boot loader IDs: >> >> - == ======================================= >> - 0x0 LILO >> - (0x00 reserved for pre-2.00 bootloader) >> - 0x1 Loadlin >> - 0x2 bootsect-loader >> - (0x20, all other values reserved) >> - 0x3 Syslinux >> - 0x4 Etherboot/gPXE/iPXE >> - 0x5 ELILO >> - 0x7 GRUB >> - 0x8 U-Boot >> - 0x9 Xen >> - 0xA Gujin >> - 0xB Qemu >> - 0xC Arcturus Networks uCbootloader >> - 0xD kexec-tools >> - 0xE Extended (see ext_loader_type) >> - 0xF Special (0xFF = undefined) >> - 0x10 Reserved >> - 0x11 Minimal Linux Bootloader >> - >> - 0x12 OVMF UEFI virtualization stack >> - 0x13 barebox >> - == ======================================= >> +==== ============================== >> +0x0 LILO >> + (0x00 reserved for pre-2.00 bootloader) >> +0x1 Loadlin >> +0x2 bootsect-loader >> + (0x20, all other values reserved) >> +0x3 Syslinux >> +0x4 Etherboot/gPXE/iPXE >> +0x5 ELILO >> +0x7 GRUB >> +0x8 U-Boot >> +0x9 Xen >> +0xA Gujin >> +0xB Qemu >> +0xC Arcturus Networks uCbootloader >> +0xD kexec-tools >> +0xE Extended (see ext_loader_type) >> +0xF Special (0xFF = undefined) >> +0x10 Reserved >> +0x11 Minimal Linux Bootloader >> + >> +0x12 OVMF UEFI virtualization stack >> +0x13 barebox >> +==== ============================== > > So why was the leading tab dropped and why wasn't this change, > unnecessary to the bug fix in question, declared in the changelog? Hi Ingo, It makes no difference to the generated html output, but for users who read Documentation/* files in place, the leading tab indentation looks a little nicer IMO. Yes? Thanks for noticing. -- ~Randy