linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Fix duplicate C declaration warnings

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 16:01:50 +0000
From: Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>
To: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
Cc: amogh.linux.kernel.dev@...il.com,  airlied@...il.com,  corbet@....net,
  daniel@...ll.ch,  dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
  javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com,  linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com,
  mripard@...nel.org,  skhan@...uxfoundation.org,  tzimmermann@...e.de,
  willy@...radead.org,  Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Fix duplicate C declaration warnings

Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com> writes:
>
> That message of mine just pointed out that the Sphinx bug of false
> duplicate C declaration warning first reported by Mauro (+CC'd) at:
> https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/8241 --
> "C domain issues when building the Linux Kernel documentation".
> It had not been resolved despite Mauro's recognition of the issue at the
> time.
>
> It was closed without fixing the bug but delegate the issue to an earlier
> one of the same nature at: https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/7819 --
> "C, distinguish between ordinary identifiers and tag names", which was
> opened on Jun 12, 2020 and has not been resolved.  (almost 4 years ago!)
>
> There is two pull requests attempting to resolve the issue at:
> https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/pull/8313 --
> "C, distinguish between tag names and ordinary names" and
> https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/pull/8929 --
> "Intersphinx delegation to domains".
> PR #8313 needs #8929 as its prerequisite.
>
> Unfortunately, both PRs are still open as well as the issue #7819.
> Honestly speaking, I don't have any idea what prevents those pulls,
> give or take the need of rebasing with conflict resolution.
>
>>                                                  So by changing the
>> function name to something like "query_drm_format_info(u32 format)" is
>> a possible fix. Question is what should I rename this function to, that
>> aligns with the coding standards? Also suggest a new function name for
>> "drm_modeset_lock" that causes the second warning.
>
> So, I would rather not rename valid identifiers for the sake of working
> around a bug of Sphinx.  Rather, I'd appreciate if you'd send a message
> encouraging Sphinx devs to resolve the issue sooner rather than later.
>
>         Thanks, Akira

Agreed, we should try and get the bug resolved in Sphinx. This same
issue came up in relation to this PR that I am working on so hopefully
we can work together to get fixes merged upstream:

https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/pull/12162

Thanks,
Donald.