linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] Documentation: Document each netlink family

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, 30 Jan 2024 09:29:22 -0800
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, kuba@...nel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Documentation: Document each netlink family

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 05:23:36PM +0100, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> 
> On 30/01/2024 17:06, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 07:22:08AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > > Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com> writes:
> > > 
> > > > On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org> wrote:
> > > > > This is a simple script that parses the Netlink YAML spec files
> > > > > (Documentation/netlink/specs/), and generates RST files to be rendered
> > > > > in the Network -> Netlink Specification documentation page.
> > > > 
> > > > First of all, my boilerplate complaint: All extra processing for Sphinx
> > > > should really be done using Sphinx extensions instead of adding Makefile
> > > > hacks. I don't think it's sustainable to keep adding this stuff. We
> > > > chose Sphinx because it is extensible, and to avoid the Rube Goldberg
> > > > machine that the previous documentation build system was.
> > > 
> > > So I feel like we've (me included) have kind of sent Breno around in
> > > circles on this one.  This *was* implemented as an extension once:
> > > 
> > >    https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20231103135622.250314-1-leitao@debian.org/
> > > 
> > > At that time it seemed too complex, and I thought that an external
> > > script would lead to a simpler implementation overall.  Perhaps I was
> > > wrong.
> > 
> > I think you are correct. I personally _think_ that the external script
> > is better, mainly because it is self contained, thus, easier to
> > maintain.
> 
> From a cursory look at the two versions, the actual Python code to read
> the YAML and write the reST is the same in both cases. (Breno, please
> correct me if I'm wrong.)

You are correct. They are similar because Sphinx was not bringing much
value to what I was trying to do (or I was not able to explore all
Sphinx benefit - It was my very first Sphinx plug-in).

That said, the plug-in was basically a wrapper around "the Python code",
that was re-used for the one-off script. So, moving from one to another
was easy.