linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] scripts/get_feat.pl: allow output the parsed file names

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:   Sat, 26 Mar 2022 00:30:50 +0100
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] scripts/get_feat.pl: allow output the parsed
 file names

Em Sat, 26 Mar 2022 00:21:09 +0100
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org> escreveu:

> Em Fri, 25 Mar 2022 13:19:28 -0600
> Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> escreveu:
> 
> > Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org> writes:
> >   
> > > Such output could be helpful while debugging it, but its main
> > > goal is to tell kernel_feat.py about what files were used
> > > by the script. Thie way, kernel_feat.py can add those as
> > > documentation dependencies.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>    
> > 
> > So I think these are worth getting into 5.18,   
> 
> Yeah, agreed.
> 
> > but I do have one question:
> >   
> > > @@ -95,6 +97,10 @@ sub parse_feat {
> > >  	return if ($file =~ m,($prefix)/arch-support.txt,);
> > >  	return if (!($file =~ m,arch-support.txt$,));
> > >  
> > > +	if ($enable_fname) {
> > > +		printf "#define FILE %s\n", abs_path($file);
> > > +	}
> > > +    
> > 
> > Why do you output the file names in this format?  This isn't input to
> > the C preprocessor, so the #define just seems strange.  What am I
> > missing here?  
> 
> Well, I didn't think much about that... I just ended using a way that is
> already used on get_abi.pl, and was originally imported from kernel-doc :-)
> 
> It could be using whatever other tag, but I would keep those three scripts 
> using a similar markup string for file names and line numbers:
> 
> scripts/get_abi.pl:
>     printf "#define LINENO %s%s#%s\n\n", $prefix, $file[0], $data{$what}->{line_no};
> 
> scripts/kernel-doc:
>     print "#define LINENO " . $lineno . "\n";

Btw, maybe we could replace them tree with a Sphinx comment, like:

get_feat.pl:
	.. FILE <file_name>
kernel-doc:
	.. LINE <line_number>
get_abi.pl:
	.. FILE_LINE <file_name>:<line_number>

(or something similar)

Just let me know what you prefer and I can take care of the needed
changes on this patch and, if it is the case, writing the extra patches
in order to use the same model on kernel-doc and get_abi.pl.

Thanks,
Mauro