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: <b9165c65-0cbe-43f0-8634-361308a01972@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 12:11:23 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Vegard Nossum
 <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>, 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



On 12/21/23 07:20, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> 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.
> 

I'm still seeing lots of Excess warnings from
  include/crypto/hash.h
  include/crypto/skcipher.h
  drivers/gpu/drm/*  (several files there have warnings)

I would be happy to see Vegard's help on this - unless Jon has already
addressed those warnings.

>> 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.

-- 
#Randy
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
https://subspace.kernel.org/etiquette.html