On Thu, 11 Sept 2025 at 16:08, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Sep 2025, at 14:49, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Sept 2025 at 13:23, Hugo Osvaldo Barrera <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, 11 Sep 2025, at 08:46, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >> > On Wed, 10 Sept 2025 at 03:58, Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> From: Hugo Osvaldo Barrera <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > > ... > >> >> +For sample implementations, refer to `the original u-boot implementation`_ or > >> >> +`the implementation in candyboot`_. > >> >> + > >> >> +.. _the original u-boot implementation: https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/commit/ec80b4735a593961fe701cc3a5d717d4739b0fd0 > >> >> +.. _the implementation in candyboot: https://git.sr.ht/~whynothugo/candyboot/tree/4097b2538d7f1cf85f03922bf42409490b666202/item/src/main.rs#L225 > >> >> > >> > > >> > What is candyboot, and why are we adding this plug for it into the > >> > Linux documentation? > >> > >> It's a UEFI stub loader which can load the Linux kernel and provide it with an > >> initramfs using the above described protocol. > >> > >> The original version of this patch was based on my notes researching _how_ > >> to implement this stub loader. The implementation is quite minimal, so I think > >> it serves as a useful reference example. > >> > > > > I think one example reference is sufficient, and I think piggybacking > > a plug of your own project onto a documentation refactoring patch is > > slightly dodgy, to be completely honest. > > I don't know what kind of reaction you're expecting. The documentation > improvements were a side-effect of developing candyboot. You're free to > exclude the mention if you feel it is inadequate, but I don't appreciate > the personal attack. > No personal attack intended. I merely commented on the changes themselves, not on your person, and the patch incorporates a reference to your own project without calling that out in the commit log. I'm sure it is a project you care about, and it looks like nice work (no irony here) but it also looks like self-promotion being injected into the Linux Documentation, given that the project in question is one of many that implement LINUX_EFI_INITRD_MEDIA_GUID, including GRUB and OVMF/edk2 which are much more widely known and much more relevant to the audience. And I am not the Documentation/ maintainer, so it is not up to me to include or exclude the reference - that is the maintainer's job, which is why I felt it appropriate to bring this to the attention of the submitter and of the other people following this thread. And this is all I am going to say about this.
