linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts: kernel-doc: allow passing desired Sphinx C domain dialect

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: <20201006084207.125c88d5@coco.lan>
Date:   Tue, 6 Oct 2020 08:42:07 +0200
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Changbin Du <changbin.du@...el.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts: kernel-doc: allow passing desired Sphinx C
 domain dialect

Em Mon, 5 Oct 2020 10:17:36 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> escreveu:

> On Sun,  4 Oct 2020 10:02:03 +0200
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > When kernel-doc is called via kerneldoc.py, there's no need to
> > auto-detect the Sphinx version, as the Sphinx module already
> > knows it. So, add an optional parameter to allow changing the
> > Sphinx dialect.
> > 
> > As kernel-doc can also be manually called, keep the auto-detection
> > logic if the parameter was not specified. On such case, emit
> > a warning if sphinx-build can't be found at PATH.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
> > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/sphinx/kerneldoc.py |  5 ++++
> >  scripts/kernel-doc                | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >  2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)  
> 
> So I'm glad to see this.  Still not fully sold on the autodetection, but if
> we don't actually use it, maybe I can live with it :)
> 
> One little nit:
> 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/sphinx/kerneldoc.py b/Documentation/sphinx/kerneldoc.py
> > index 233f610539f0..e9857ab904f1 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/sphinx/kerneldoc.py
> > +++ b/Documentation/sphinx/kerneldoc.py
> > +    } elsif ($cmd eq "sphinx-version") {
> > +	my $ver_string = shift @ARGV;
> > +	if ($ver_string =~ m/^(\d+)\.(\d+)\.(\d+)/) {
> > +	    $sphinx_major = $1;
> > +	    $sphinx_minor = $2;
> > +	    $sphinx_patch = $3;
> > +	} else {
> > +	    die "Sphinx version should be at major.minor.patch format\n";
> > +	}  
> 
> Can we allow just major.minor, with patch defaulting to zero?  People
> passing this by hand may not want to look up their patch version every
> time, and I doubt it will ever matter...

Sure. It should be easy to make the third argument optional, although
the regex will be a little more harder to understand.

Something like this should do the trick:

diff --git a/scripts/kernel-doc b/scripts/kernel-doc
index 01efb0afb8c2..104d79949a8a 100755
--- a/scripts/kernel-doc
+++ b/scripts/kernel-doc
@@ -466,12 +466,16 @@ while ($ARGV[0] =~ m/^--?(.*)/) {
 	$show_not_found = 1;  # A no-op but don't fail
     } elsif ($cmd eq "sphinx-version") {
 	my $ver_string = shift @ARGV;
-	if ($ver_string =~ m/^(\d+)\.(\d+)\.(\d+)/) {
+	if ($ver_string =~ m/^(\d+)\.(\d+)(?:\.?(\d+)?)/) {
 	    $sphinx_major = $1;
 	    $sphinx_minor = $2;
-	    $sphinx_patch = $3;
+	    if ($3) {
+		$sphinx_patch = $3;
+	    } else {
+		$sphinx_patch = 0;
+	    }
 	} else {
-	    die "Sphinx version should be at major.minor.patch format\n";
+	    die "Sphinx version should either major.minor or major.minor.patch format\n";
 	}
     } else {
 	# Unknown argument

As right now we don't support Sphinx version 3.0[1], we're actually using just
$sphinx_major. So, I'm wonder if it would make sense to also make <minor>
optional.

The change would be trivial, although the regex will become even more
harder to read ;-)

[1] not sure how valuable would be adding support for Sphinx 3.0. While
I didn't make any tests, I'm strongly suspecting that, with the approach
we took for backward/forward compatibility, adding support for it
would mean to just do a trivial change at cdomain.py by applying a
patch that Markus did replacing a regex function that doesn't exist
anymore at Sphinx API and emulating C namespace with the logic I
already implemented. 

I guess I'll give it a try anyway, as it seems weird to have a gap
in the middle of the supported versions.


Thanks,
Mauro