linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Fix some issues at get

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87lfabys5h.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
Date:   Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:01:14 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Fix some issues at get_abi.pl script

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

> This series replace this patch:
> 	https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/20210324191722.08d352e4@coco.lan/T/#t
>
> It turns that there were multiple bugs at the get_abi.pl code that
> create cross-references.
>
> Patches 1 to 6 fix those issues, and should apply cleanly on the top of
> the docs tree (although I tested against next-20210323).
>
> Patch 7 is optional, and independent from the other patches. It is meant
> to be applied against akpm's tree.  It makes the description (IMHO) 
> clearer, while producing cross references for the two mentioned symbols.

So perhaps this is the best solution to the problem, but I must confess
to not being entirely happy with it.  get_abi.pl is becoming another
unreadable perlpile like kerneldoc, and this makes it worse.  Doing RST
parsing there seems particularly unwelcome.

Should the cross-reference generation, it now occurs to me, be done in
the automarkup module instead?  Then there's no need to interpret RST,
and we'd get cross-references throughout the kernel docs rather than in
just the ABI stuff.  Am I completely out to lunch here?

Thanks,

jon