linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the akpm-current tree

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]

Date:   Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:42:23 +1100
From:   "Anand K. Mistry" <amistry@...gle.com>
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the akpm-current tree

On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 18:03, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 05:45:49PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> > produced this warning:
> >
> > Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst:296: WARNING: Malformed table.
> > Text in column margin in table line 61.
> >
> > ==========================  ===================================================
> > Field                       Content
> > ==========================  ===================================================
>   ...
> > Speculation_Store_Bypass    speculative store bypass mitigation status
> > Speculation_Indirect_Branch indirect branch speculation mode
>   ...
> > ==========================  ===================================================
> > Documentation/filesystems/proc.rst:234: WARNING: Error parsing content block for the "table" directive: exactly one table expected.
>
> Looks like left column became too wide, so rather than shift the right
> column to the right, I'd suggest to drop underscores in Speculation*.

Hm. That makes it inconsistent with Speculation_Store_Bypass. I guess
it's the lesser of two evils.

How would I go about fixing this? Send a new (v2), fixed patch to the
mailing list? I'm not that familiar with how patches get merged
through the branches.

>
> >
> > .. table:: Table 1-2: Contents of the status files (as of 4.19)
> >
> >  ==========================  ===================================================
> >  Field                       Content
> >  ==========================  ===================================================
>    ...
> >  Speculation_Store_Bypass    speculative store bypass mitigation status
> >  Speculation_Indirect_Branch indirect branch speculation mode
> >  Cpus_allowed                mask of CPUs on which this process may run
> >  Cpus_allowed_list           Same as previous, but in "list format"
> >  Mems_allowed                mask of memory nodes allowed to this process
> >  Mems_allowed_list           Same as previous, but in "list format"
> >  voluntary_ctxt_switches     number of voluntary context switches
> >  nonvoluntary_ctxt_switches  number of non voluntary context switches
> >  ==========================  ===================================================
>
> Same here.
>
> > Introduced by commit
> >
> >   60b492d745d5 ("proc: provide details on indirect branch speculation")
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> > Stephen Rothwell
>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.



-- 
Anand K. Mistry
Software Engineer
Google Australia