linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] kernel-doc: rename the kernel-doc directive 'functions' to 'specific'

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: <ECADFF3FD767C149AD96A924E7EA6EAF977CAF09@USCULXMSG01.am.sony.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Oct 2019 20:48:48 +0000
From:   <Tim.Bird@...y.com>
To:     <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, <changbin.du@...il.com>,
        <corbet@....net>
CC:     <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <changbin.du@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] kernel-doc: rename the kernel-doc directive 'functions'
 to 'specific'



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jani Nikula on October 13, 2019 11:00 PM
> On Sun, 13 Oct 2019, Changbin Du <changbin.du@...il.com> wrote:
> > The 'functions' directive is not only for functions, but also works for
> > structs/unions. So the name is misleading. This patch renames it to
> > 'specific', so now we have export/internal/specific directives to limit
> > the functions/types to be included in documentation. Meanwhile we
> improved
> > the warning message.
> 
> Agreed on "functions" being less than perfect. It directly exposes the
> idiosyncrasies of scripts/kernel-doc. I'm not sure "specific" is any
> better, though.

I strongly agree with this.  'specific' IMHO, has no semantic value and
I'd rather just leave the only-sometimes-wrong 'functions' than convert
to something that obscures the meaning always.

> 
> Perhaps "symbols" would be more self-explanatory. Or, actually make
> "functions" only work on functions, and add a separate keyword for other
> stuff. *shrug*
My preference would be to use 'symbols'.  I tried to come up with something
but 'symbols' is better than anything I came up with.

> 
> Seems like the patch is way too big. I'd probably add "symbols" (or
> whatever) as a synonym for "functions" for starters, and convert
> documents piecemeal, and finally drop the old one.
> 
> The scripts/kernel-doc change should be a patch of its own.
Agreed on these two points as well.

Just adding my 2 cents.
 -- Tim