linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the ftrace 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]

Message-ID: <20201116122432.796af13b@lwn.net>
Date:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:24:32 -0700
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.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 ftrace tree

On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 12:43:38 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:

> > After merging the ftrace tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> > produced this warning:
> > 
> > Documentation/trace/ftrace-uses.rst:123: WARNING: Unexpected indentation.
> > 
> > Introduced by commit
> > 
> >   a25d036d939a ("ftrace: Reverse what the RECURSION flag means in the ftrace_ops")
> >   
> 
> I'm not good at rst markup. Not sure how to fix this.

Looking at the commit in question:

> +Protect your callback
> +=====================
> +
> +As functions can be called from anywhere, and it is possible that a function
> +called by a callback may also be traced, and call that same callback,
> +recursion protection must be used. There are two helper functions that
> +can help in this regard. If you start your code with:
> +
> +	int bit;
> +
> +	bit = ftrace_test_recursion_trylock();
> +	if (bit < 0)
> +		return;

The problem is those literal blocks.  The easiest fix will be to just use
the double-colon notation to indicate a literal block, so the paragraph
above would end with "...start your code with::".  Note that there's a few
of them to fix.

Thanks,

jon