linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Documentation/kernel-parameters: Move the kernel build options

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: <87ldk2111o.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 08:42:43 -0700
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...nel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, LKML
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/kernel-parameters: Move the kernel build
 options

Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> writes:

> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 09:20:36AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>> So I applied this, but it's dancing around the real problem: that this
>> material is split into two files in the first place.  I honestly don't
>> remember why it was done that way
>
> I was wondering the same thing.
>
>> - maybe just to ease the RST transition back in 2016.  I think we should
>> really just pull all of kernel-parameters.txt into the RST file.
>
> Except the .txt file has its own formatting and if the conversion to .rst
> makes it more unreadable due to the .rst formatting gunk, that would be a step
> in the wrong direction, I'd say.
>
> So including it verbatim as it is done now looks like a good compromise.
> Unless you have a better idea...

What the effect would be of making it all into proper RST is unclear, I
don't think anybody has tried.

But we could certainly just put the whole contents of
kernel-parameters.txt as a literal block within kernel-parameters.rst
and at least have it all in one place.

jon