linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] doc: fix code snippet build warnings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:37:02 -0800
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     "Tobin C. Harding" <me@...in.cc>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Linux docs <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] doc: fix code snippet build warnings

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 03:04:53PM +1100, Tobin C. Harding wrote:
> Posting as RFC in the hope that someone knows how to massage sphinx
> correctly to fix this patch.

I would welcome that.  ;-)

> Currently function kernel-doc contains a multi-line code snippet. This
> is causing sphinx to emit 5 build warnings
> 
> 	WARNING: Unexpected indentation.
> 	WARNING: Unexpected indentation.
> 	WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
> 	WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
> 	WARNING: Inline literal start-string without end-string.
> 
> And the snippet is not rendering correctly in HTML.
> 
> We can stop shpinx complaining by using '::' instead of the currently
> used '``' however this still does not render correctly in HTML. The
> rendering is [arguably] better but still incorrect. Sphinx renders two
> function calls thus:
> 
> 	:c:func:`rcu_read_lock()`;
> 
> The rest of the snippet does however have correct spacing.
> 
> Use '::' to pre-fix code snippet. Clears build warnings but does not
> render correctly.

If the usual docbook suspects ack this, I would be happy to carry it.

Cue debate over silent vs. noisy errors.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

> Signed-off-by: Tobin C. Harding <me@...in.cc>
> ---
> 
> To view current broken rendering see
> 
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/core-api/kernel-api.html?highlight=rcu_pointer_handoff#c.rcu_pointer_handoff
> 
>  include/linux/rcupdate.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/rcupdate.h b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> index a6ddc42f87a5..cc10e772e3e9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rcupdate.h
> @@ -568,7 +568,8 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void) { }
>   * is handed off from RCU to some other synchronization mechanism, for
>   * example, reference counting or locking.  In C11, it would map to
>   * kill_dependency().  It could be used as follows:
> - * ``
> + * ::
> + *
>   *	rcu_read_lock();
>   *	p = rcu_dereference(gp);
>   *	long_lived = is_long_lived(p);
> @@ -579,7 +580,6 @@ static inline void rcu_preempt_sleep_check(void) { }
>   *			p = rcu_pointer_handoff(p);
>   *	}
>   *	rcu_read_unlock();
> - *``
>   */
>  #define rcu_pointer_handoff(p) (p)
> 
> -- 
> 2.7.4
>