linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] gpiolib: Update the kernel documentation

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, 9 Apr 2024 16:18:46 +0200
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>, Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>, 
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, brcm80211@...ts.linux.dev, 
	brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com, 
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, 
	Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>, 
	Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] gpiolib: Update the kernel documentation - add
 Return sections

On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 4:06 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 04:01:43PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 2:52 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 02:12:51AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > $ scripts/kernel-doc -v -none -Wall drivers/gpio/gpiolib* 2>&1 | grep -w warning | wc -l
> > > > 67
> > > >
> > > > Fix these by adding Return sections. While at it, make sure all of
> > > > Return sections use the same style.
> > >
> > > Since there shouldn't be hard dependency to the first one, can you consider
> > > applying this one, so it unblocks me?
> >
> > I'm not sure what the resolution is for % and HTML <font> tags in the end?
>
> Most of the constants are without %, so less churn now is to drop %.
> If you think otherwise, please, fix it and I will rebase my patches later.
>

I'm not sure I get the logic of it. If the kernel-wide standard is to
use %, then we should work towards using it across the GPIO code even
if we do it a few lines at a time instead of going backwards just for
consistency in drivers/gpio/, no? We don't need to fix everything now
but if you're touching this code, then I'd go with %.

Also: what about the s/error-code/error code/g issue? While we should
always say "active-low", I think error code looks better as two words.

Bart