linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 24/26] locking/atomic: scripts: generate kerneldoc comments

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:   Wed, 24 May 2023 16:11:52 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        boqun.feng@...il.com, corbet@....net, keescook@...omium.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
        sstabellini@...nel.org, will@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/26] locking/atomic: scripts: generate kerneldoc
 comments

On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 11:03:58PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:

> > * All ops are described as an expression using their usual C operator.
> >   For example:
> > 
> >   andnot: "Atomically updates @v to (@v & ~@i)"
> 
> The kernel-doc script converts "~@i" into reST source of "~**i**",
> where the emphasis of i is not recognized by Sphinx.
> 
> For the "@" to work as expected, please say "~(@i)" or "~ @i".
> My preference is the former.

And here we start :-/ making the actual comment less readable because
retarded tooling.

> >   inc:    "Atomically updates @v to (@v + 1)"
> > 
> >   Which may be clearer to non-naative English speakers, and allows all
>                             non-native
> 
> >   the operations to be described in the same style.
> > 
> > * All conditional ops have their condition described as an expression
> >   using the usual C operators. For example:
> > 
> >   add_unless: "If (@v != @u), atomically updates @v to (@v + @i)"
> >   cmpxchg:    "If (@v == @old), atomically updates @v to @new"
> > 
> >   Which may be clearer to non-naative English speakers, and allows all
> 
> Ditto.

How about we just keep it as is, and all the rst and html weenies learn
to use a text editor to read code comments?