linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] Further kernel-doc tweakery

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: <87zfdljfv9.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2025 12:20:26 -0600
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
 <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>, Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Further kernel-doc tweakery

Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com> writes:

> Hi Jon,
>
> On Tue,  1 Jul 2025 14:57:23 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> This is a set of miscellaneous improvements, finishing my pass over the
>> first parsing pass and getting into the second ("dump_*") pass.
>> 
>> Jonathan Corbet (7):
>>   docs: kdoc: don't reinvent string.strip()
>>   docs: kdoc: micro-optimize KernRe
>>   docs: kdoc: remove the brcount floor in process_proto_type()
>>   docs: kdoc: rework type prototype parsing
>>   docs: kdoc: some tweaks to process_proto_function()
>>   docs: kdoc: Remove a Python 2 comment
>>   docs: kdoc: pretty up dump_enum()
>> 
>>  Documentation/sphinx/kerneldoc.py |   2 -
>>  scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py   | 150 +++++++++++++++---------------
>>  scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_re.py       |   6 +-
>>  3 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 79 deletions(-)
>> 
>
> I just applied this set and got the error of:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>   File "/<srcdir>/scripts/lib/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py", line 881
>     	    else:
>     ^
> TabError: inconsistent use of tabs and spaces in indentation
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I didn't look into individual patches, assuming it should be an easy fix
> for you.
>
> I guess it'd be better to test (and hopefully to review) other pending
> series from you and Mauro ...

Yes, sorry, I ran into that after sending ... I have no idea which weird
last-second edit introduced that error.  It worked before, honest...

I'll go ahead and send a new series shortly.

Thanks for testing!

jon