linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the libcrypto 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: <41d848b0-58e9-4fed-8efa-d24ab5d30221@infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 21:43:19 -0800
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
 David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
 Linux Crypto List <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
 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 libcrypto tree

On 11/5/25 7:55 PM, Eric Biggers wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 02:36:23PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the libcrypto tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
>> produced this warning:
>>
>> WARNING: /home/sfr/kernels/next/next/include/crypto/sha3.h:74 This comment starts with '/**', but isn't a kernel-doc comment. Refer Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst
>>  * Zeroize a sha3_ctx.  This is already called by sha3_final().  Call this
>>
>> Introduced by commit
>>
>>   58873ecf091b ("lib/crypto: sha3: Add SHA-3 support")
> 
> Thanks.  Do you know if there's an easy way to find these ahead of time?
> I usually run './scripts/kernel-doc -v -none ${filename}' to catch
> kerneldoc issues.  I did run it on include/crypto/sha3.h, but for some
> reason it doesn't detect this issue.
> 
> 'make htmldocs' doesn't find it either, but does generate a bunch of
> unrelated warnings.  I may be missing an option to make it even more
> verbose.  Either way, it's also slow to run.

Try -Wall, although it may give you more warnings than you care to know about.
You can separately enable these (which are set by -Wall):

There are also:
  -Wreturn, --wreturn   Warns about the lack of a return markup on functions.
  -Wshort-desc, -Wshort-description, --wshort-desc
                        Warns if initial short description is missing

I don't get anything useful from -v unless I am debugging the script.

-- 
~Randy