linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] platform/x86: wmi: Add documentation

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:   Tue, 25 Apr 2023 13:42:19 -0700
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        markgross@...nel.org
Cc:     corbet@....net, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] platform/x86: wmi: Add documentation



On 4/25/23 13:29, Armin Wolf wrote:
> Am 25.04.23 um 18:30 schrieb Hans de Goede:
> 
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Armin thank you very mich for the WMI documentation work,
>> this is much appreciated!
>>
>> On 4/25/23 05:07, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> Hi--
>>>
>>> On 4/24/23 15:29, Armin Wolf wrote:
>>>> Add documentation for the WMI subsystem. The documentation describes
>>>> both the ACPI WMI interface and the driver API for interacting with
>>>> the WMI driver core. The information regarding the ACPI interface
>>>> was retrieved from the Ubuntu kernel references and the Windows driver
>>>> samples available on GitHub. The documentation is supposed to help
>>>> driver developers writing WMI drivers, as many modern machines designed
>>>> to run Windows provide an ACPI WMI interface.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
>>>> ---
>>>>   Documentation/driver-api/index.rst   |  1 +
>>>>   Documentation/driver-api/wmi.rst     | 21 ++++++
>>>>   Documentation/subsystem-apis.rst     |  1 +
>>>>   Documentation/wmi/acpi-interface.rst | 96 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   Documentation/wmi/index.rst          | 18 ++++++
>>>>   MAINTAINERS                          |  2 +
>>>>   6 files changed, 139 insertions(+)
>>>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/driver-api/wmi.rst
>>>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/wmi/acpi-interface.rst
>>>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/wmi/index.rst
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/wmi.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/wmi.rst
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 000000000000..6ca58c8249e5
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/wmi.rst
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
>>>> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
>>>> +
>>>> +==============
>>>> +WMI Driver API
>>>> +==============
>>>> +
>>>> +The WMI driver core supports a more modern bus-based interface for interacting
>>>> +with WMI devices, and an older GUID-based interface. The latter interface is
>>>> +considered to be deprecated, so new WMI drivers should generally avoid it since
>>>> +it has some issues with multiple WMI devices and events sharing the same GUIDs
>>>> +and/or notification IDs. The modern bus-based interface instead maps each
>>>> +WMI device to a :c:type:`struct wmi_device <wmi_device>`, so it supports
>>>> +WMI devices sharing GUIDs and/or notification IDs. Drivers can then register
>>>> +a :c:type:`struct wmi_driver <wmi_driver>`, which will be bound to compatible
>>>> +WMI devices by the driver core.
>>>> +
>>>> +.. kernel-doc:: include/linux/wmi.h
>>>> +   :internal:
>>> There are no kernel-doc comments in include/linux/wmi.h, so this
>>> causes a kernel-doc warning:
>>>
>>> ../include/linux/wmi.h:1: warning: no structured comments found
>>>
>>> Otherwise this all looks good.
>> So what is the plan here, is there something we can do to fix this
>> new warning and should I expect a v3?  Or shall I merge this as is ?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Hans
>>
> I did a complete rebuild of the documentation on my machine, and this
> error message did not appear. Also include/linux/wmi.h does include
> kernel-doc comments for macros like wmi_driver_register(), so i do not
> know why this warning is issued by sphinx.

OK, Hans, go ahead and merge it as is.

Thanks.
-- 
~Randy