linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] script: get_abi.pl: escape "<" and ">" characters

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:   Wed, 24 Mar 2021 11:12:37 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>,
        Finn Behrens <me@...enk.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] script: get_abi.pl: escape "<" and ">" characters

Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> writes:

> After merging the akpm-current tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> produced this warning:
>
> 	Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-cma:2: WARNING: Inline interpreted text or phrase reference start-string without end-string.
>
> Introduced by commit 439d477342a3 ("mm: cma: support sysfs")
>
> As pointed by Jonathan, the problem is this text in
> sysfs-kernel-mm-cma:
>
> 	Each CMA heap subdirectory (that is, each
> 	/sys/kernel/mm/cma/<cma-heap-name> directory) contains the
> 	following items:
>
> Is not parsed well, becase the major/minor signs need to be
> escaped, when converted into cross-references.

Sorry, I kind of dropped the ball on this, and everything else really; a
bit of a challenging time here.

This makes the warning go away, but I have to wonder if it's the right
fix - wouldn't it be better to avoid trying to create a cross-reference
entirely in cases where it clearly won't work?  Or am I missing
something here?

Thanks,

jon