linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/12] thunderbolt: pa: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc headers

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: <20210127170035.GG2542@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Jan 2021 19:00:35 +0200
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
        Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
        Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] thunderbolt: pa: Demote non-conformant kernel-doc
 headers

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 04:13:20PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2021, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday, January 27, 2021, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > Fixes the following W=1 kernel build warning(s):
> > >
> > >  drivers/thunderbolt/path.c:476: warning: Function parameter or member
> > > 'path' not described in 'tb_path_activate'
> > >  drivers/thunderbolt/path.c:568: warning: Function parameter or member
> > > 'path' not described in 'tb_path_is_invalid'
> > >
> > >
> > I think the intention was to describe them in kernel doc format, perhaps
> > you need to add descriptions of the fields?
> 
> For changes like this, I've been working to the following rule:
> 
>  - I'll provide fix-ups; if and only if the author has had a
>  reasonable attempt at providing a conformant kernel-doc header.
> 
> So if the headers are just suffering from a little doc-rot i.e. the
> API has changed, but the doc update was omitted, or most of the
> parameters/members are documented, but some were forgotten about etc,
> or if there are formatting issues, I'll happily take up the slack and
> polish those up a bit.
> 
> However, if no attempt was made, then they get demoted.
> 
> I don't want to get into a situation where authors delicately provide
> weak documentation with the expectation that someone else will come
> along and turn them into conformant docs.
> 
> If authors wish to come back, provide proper descriptions &
> formatting and subsequently re-promote them again, then all power to
> them.

Thanks for pointing these out. I prefer we fix the kernel-docs (add what
is missing) instead. I'll take care of that.