linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] bpf.2: Use standard types and attributes

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: <56932c68-4992-c5e4-819f-a88f60b3f63a@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 24 Apr 2021 19:56:37 +0200
From:   "Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" <alx.manpages@...il.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
        linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, libc-alpha@...rceware.org,
        gcc-patches@....gnu.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] bpf.2: Use standard types and attributes

Hello Alexei,

On 4/24/21 1:20 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> Nack.
> The man page should describe the kernel api the way it is in .h file.

Why?

When glibc uses __size_t (or any other non-standard types) just because 
the standard doesn't allow it to define some types in some specific 
header, the manual pages document the equivalent standard type, (i.e., 
if glibc uses __size_t, we document size_t).

The compiler, AFAIK (gcc is CCd, so they can jump in if I'm wrong), 
using uint32_t in every situation where __u32 is expected.  They're both 
typedefs for the same basic type.

I can understand why Linux will keep using u32 types (and their __ user 
space variants), but that doesn't mean user space programs need to use 
the same type.

If we have a standard syntax for fixed-width integral types (and for 
anything, actually), the manual pages should probably follow it, 
whenever possible.  Any deviation from the standard (be it C or POSIX) 
should have a very good reason to be;  otherwise, it only creates confusion.

Thanks,

Alex

-- 
Alejandro Colomar
Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Senior SW Engineer; http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/