linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: Fix kernel-doc

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Yp8v1OPPOlb9A16D@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 7 Jun 2022 13:00:36 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Cc:     Jiapeng Chong <jiapeng.chong@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Larry.Finger@...inger.net, phil@...lpotter.co.uk,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: Fix kernel-doc

On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 02:58:56PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 07:53:02AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 04:39:14PM +0800, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
> > > Fix the following W=1 kernel warnings:
> > > 
> > > drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/rtl8188e_phycfg.c:291: warning: expecting
> > > prototype for Function(). Prototype was for rtl8188e_PHY_SetRFReg()
> > > instead.
> > > 
> > > drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/rtl8188e_phycfg.c:257: warning: expecting
> > > prototype for Function(). Prototype was for rtl8188e_PHY_QueryRFReg()
> > > instead.
> > 
> > Please put build warning lines all on one line.
> > 
> > > 
> > > Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@...ux.alibaba.com>
> > 
> > No, gcc reported this, not a robot, right?
> > 
> > You have read Documentation/process/researcher-guidelines.rst for how to
> > properly document patches that are created by research tools like this,
> > right?  Please fix this commit up to follow those requirements please.
> > 
> 
> Hi Greg and Jiapeng,
> 
> First, IMO this is not research tool (in the sense of academic purposes),
> but development bot used in corporate environment, kinda like kernel
> test robot <lkp@...el.com>. When the bot reports any build warnings,
> these will be followed up by developers proposing fixes.

Ok, then please document it as such and point to where we can find out
more information about it.

> What I see in the patch message is just "Fix this warning..." without
> saying why there is the warning.

Which isn't ok.

> Second, gcc DOESN'T, again DOESN'T, report "expecting prototype"
> warnings. These are from scripts/kernel-doc, which enabled these
> warnings on W=1 build.

Yes, the kernel build reports this, not a random "robot".

> So the underlying problem is mismatching function name in kernel-doc
> comment and actual function.

Agreed, so the changelog should say as such.

thanks,

greg k-h