linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 01/24] Documentation: locking: Describe seqlock design and usage

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: <20200720215115.4c5276db@oasis.local.home>
Date:   Mon, 20 Jul 2020 21:51:15 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     "Ahmed S. Darwish" <a.darwish@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        "Sebastian A. Siewior" <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/24] Documentation: locking: Describe seqlock
 design and usage

On Mon, 20 Jul 2020 21:44:00 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> > - * This is not as cache friendly as brlock. Also, this may not work well
> > - * for data that contains pointers, because any writer could
> > - * invalidate a pointer that a reader was following.
> > + * See Documentation/locking/seqlock.rst  
> 
> I absolutely hate it when I see this.
> 
> I much rather have the documentation next to the code. Because
> honestly, I trust that comments next to the code will get updated if
> the code changes much more likely than comments buried in the
> Documentation directory.
> 
> It's also more likely that I wont even bother looking at the doc
> (because I wont trust it to be up to date) and just read the code and
> try to figure it out. Or look at how others have used it.

Never mind,

I see that kerneldoc is added in patch 5, which helps.

-- Steve