linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scripts/kernel-doc: restore warning for Excess struct/union

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]

Message-ID: <877cl7a8gh.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 08:20:14 -0700
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>, Randy Dunlap
 <rdunlap@...radead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/kernel-doc: restore warning for Excess
 struct/union

Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com> writes:

> On 15/12/2023 17:28, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> *sigh*
>> 
>> This adds nearly 600 new warnings.  Anybody gonna help fix them?
>
> I think in the vast majority of the cases the fix will be to just remove
> the offending line from the kerneldoc, so it's not particularly
> difficult, mostly just overhead from the patch preparation/submission
> process.
>
> I'd be happy to take a stab at it -- I think we could even script most
> of it. Respond here, I guess, if anybody else wants to do some so we can
> split it up.

It's mostly done; I've gotten it down to under 200 and sent patches to
make the changes.  Randy is working on it too, I know.  It's not always
just deletion, but the fixes are usually pretty straightforward.

> On a related note, it might be useful to have some kind of "status page"
> somewhere on the web for the docs where you can see a list of unresolved
> documentation warnings in mainline/docs-next/next without having to do a
> local build first (as a way to solicit contributions).

I suppose, but how do you know you've properly addressed the warning if
you don't do a build afterward?  I don't see that saving a whole lot of
effort, but maybe I'm missing something?

Thanks,

jon