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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <874k3ld1j2.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 18:02:09 -0600
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>
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

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

> 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.

If it were just me, I'd just put "FILE <name>" or something simple.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter though; it's not like
people have to actually look at these things.  I was mostly curious as
to why you'd done it that way.  I can take the original patches or any
of the variants above; just let me know which you like best and we'll
get this done.

Thanks,

jon