linux-kernel - Re: Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel

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]

Message-ID: <20171014161413.55k6xmil5qvjbtwk@katana>
Date:   Sat, 14 Oct 2017 18:14:13 +0200
From:   Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To:     "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Documentation: add Kernel Driver Statement to the kernel

On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 11:10:38AM +0200, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org wrote:
> Way back in 2008 we didn't have "robust" in-kernel documentation system,
> so the idea of putting something like the kernel driver statement in the
> kernel tree wasn't even imagined.  But now that has changed, so add the
> old document to the kernel source itself to allow for us to properly
> reference it in one canonical place (as the LF wiki keeps moving things
> around.)

Cool, I like it much to see it added to the kernel tree.

But could you explain what "robust" means in this context? And what
has changed which makes it "robust"? Sphinx?

I am interested in how such documents are handled best.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)