linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the vfs-brauner tree

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: <Z7WaNWHRkqt2rFGA@archie.me>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 15:45:41 +0700
From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
Cc: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the vfs-brauner tree

On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 03:34:44PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> After merging the vfs-brauner tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> produced this warning:
> 
> Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst:1173: ERROR: Unexpected indentation. [docutils]
> 
> Introduced by commit
> 
>   20c2c1baa9ab ("VFS: add common error checks to lookup_one_qstr_excl()")
> 

Separating the bullet list should suffice (plus s/recommend/recommended/
for consistency with the rest of docs):

---- >8 ----
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst
index 3b6622fbd66be9..cfac50a7258db6 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/porting.rst
@@ -1166,10 +1166,11 @@ kern_path_locked() and user_path_locked() no longer return a negative
 dentry so this doesn't need to be checked.  If the name cannot be found,
 ERR_PTR(-ENOENT) is returned.
 
-** recommend**
+** recommended**
 
 lookup_one_qstr_excl() is changed to return errors in more cases, so
-these conditions don't require explicit checks.
+these conditions don't require explicit checks:
+
  - if LOOKUP_CREATE is NOT given, then the dentry won't be negative,
    ERR_PTR(-ENOENT) is returned instead
  - if LOOKUP_EXCL IS given, then the dentry won't be positive,

Let me know if I should send the formal patch.

Thanks.

-- 
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)