linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] kernel-doc: Remove deprecated kernel-doc option 'functions'

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, 23 Jan 2024 11:53:59 +0100
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, 
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
 x86@...nel.org, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Herbert Xu
 <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
 Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>, Wu Hao
 <hao.wu@...el.com>, Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>,  Dipen Patel
 <dipenp@...dia.com>, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, Heikki
 Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>, David Airlie
 <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, Maarten Lankhorst
 <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
 Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
 Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>, 
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kernel-doc: Remove deprecated kernel-doc option
 'functions'

On Mon, 2024-01-22 at 14:28 +0100, Anna-Maria Behnsen wrote:

> the kernel-doc option 'functions' is marked deprecated and is simply an
> alias for 'identifiers'

Is it actually a good idea though that it's deprecated and an alias?

I mean, we have a problem today that sphinx/kernel-doc/whatever cannot
deal with having both

 - struct cfg80211_rx_assoc_resp
 - cfg80211_rx_assoc_resp()

I think at some point I found there's some kind of ticket open against
that, and while I don't hope it will be fixed soon (and we renamed that
struct because of it), maybe doing these changes will make it harder to
eventually deal with such a thing?

johannes