Re: [PATCH] docs/dev-tools: fix a broken URL in dev-tools/coccinelle.rst

[Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2178 bytes --]



On Tue, 10 Mar 2026, Nicolas Palix wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Maybe we can just throw away that section of "Supplemental documentation" and
> its link ?
>
> Nowadays, there is much more SmPL provided, and the rst file
> describes better and up-to-date information.
>
> Would a link to
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/dev-tools/coccinelle.html
> be useful to point to latest version ?

OK, thanks.

There is also an out of date URL in that page.  I will send a patch.

julia

>
> Sincerely,
>
> Le 09/03/2026 à 17:28, Haoyang Liu a écrit :
> >
> > On 3/10/2026 12:10 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > > LIU Haoyang <tttturtleruss@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > The original supplemental documentation for coccicheck is
> > > > https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck, which redirects to a not
> > > > found page,
> > > > thus change it to https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck.html,
> > > > which adds a suffix to original URL to make it direct to the right page.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: LIU Haoyang <tttturtleruss@gmail.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >   Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst | 2 +-
> > > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst b/Documentation/
> > > > dev-tools/coccinelle.rst
> > > > index 2b942e3c8049..f73ccf5397f3 100644
> > > > --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst
> > > > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ Supplemental documentation
> > > >   For supplemental documentation refer to the wiki:
> > > > -https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck
> > > > +https://bottest.wiki.kernel.org/coccicheck.html
> > > >   The wiki documentation always refers to the linux-next version of the
> > > > script.
> > > I'll apply this - a working URL is better than a broken one.  But is
> > > there really nothing better to link to than a page that warns "OBSOLETE
> > > CONTENT" at the top?
> >
> > Dear Jon,
> >
> > Unfortunately, I do not find any other documents about this script, so I
> > have to use it even though it's obsolete.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Haoyang
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > jon
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>