linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9] docs: kdoc: remove the KernelEntry::is_kernel

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: <20250607120745.7e0fee67@foz.lan>
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2025 12:07:45 +0200
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] docs: kdoc: remove the
 KernelEntry::is_kernel_comment member

Em Fri,  6 Jun 2025 10:34:34 -0600
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> escreveu:

> entry::is_kernel_comment never had anything to do with the entry itself; it
> is a bit of local state in one branch of process_name().  It can, in fact,
> be removed entirely; rework the code slightly so that it is no longer
> needed.
> 
> No change in the rendered output.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>

Not sure about this one. The idea of those warnings are to detect 
non-kerneldoc markups that typically comes when someone "imports"
OOT drivers or Windows one into Linux.

I remember I catched several such cases in the past with the help
of those warnings.

> ---
>  scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py | 16 ++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py b/scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py
> index 3ea260b423e2..56299695abd1 100644
> --- a/scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py
> +++ b/scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py
> @@ -1216,7 +1216,6 @@ class KernelDoc:
>  
>          if doc_decl.search(line):
>              self.entry.identifier = doc_decl.group(1)
> -            self.entry.is_kernel_comment = False
>  
>              decl_start = str(doc_com)       # comment block asterisk
>              fn_type = r"(?:\w+\s*\*\s*)?"  # type (for non-functions)
> @@ -1234,14 +1233,20 @@ class KernelDoc:
>              if r.search(line):
>                  self.entry.decl_type = r.group(1)
>                  self.entry.identifier = r.group(2)
> -                self.entry.is_kernel_comment = True
>              #
>              # Look for a function description
>              #
>              elif r2.search(line):
>                  self.entry.identifier = r2.group(1)
>                  self.entry.decl_type = "function"
> -                self.entry.is_kernel_comment = True
> +            #
> +            # We struck out.
> +            #
> +            else:
> +                self.emit_msg(ln,
> +                              f"This comment starts with '/**', but isn't a kernel-doc comment. Refer Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst\n{line}")
> +                self.state = state.NORMAL
> +                return
>  
>              self.entry.identifier = self.entry.identifier.strip(" ")
>  
> @@ -1263,11 +1268,6 @@ class KernelDoc:
>              else:
>                  self.entry.declaration_purpose = ""
>  
> -            if not self.entry.is_kernel_comment:
> -                self.emit_msg(ln,
> -                              f"This comment starts with '/**', but isn't a kernel-doc comment. Refer Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst\n{line}")
> -                self.state = state.NORMAL
> -
>              if not self.entry.declaration_purpose and self.config.wshort_desc:
>                  self.emit_msg(ln,
>                                f"missing initial short description on line:\n{line}")



Thanks,
Mauro