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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 10 Jul 2018 13:46:24 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] docs, debugfs: start explicit debugfs documentation

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 05:28:35AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 08:45:06 +0200
> Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > For the "this is what a specific debugfs file contains", those should go
> > into Documenation/ABI/ if you really want to document those types of
> > things.
> 
> Do we really want to start populating Documentation/ABI with stuff that's
> explicitly *not* ABI?  Keeping it separate might make more sense, IMO.
> I'd put extfrag_index with the MM docs, for example.

I personally don't think that debugfs files should be documented
anywhere, unless it makes sense from a "help debug the kernel" point of
view.  And yes, you are right, we don't want to document things in /ABI/
that are not ABI stuff, as debugfs files can, and do, change at random
times.

Putting the info in the subsystem specific documents makes sense.

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ