netdev - Re: [RFC bpf-next] bpf: document eBPF helpers and add a script to generate man page

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: <550CD0C6-10B5-4C8C-9C1E-70AA61ABDC34@darmarit.de>
Date:   Mon, 9 Apr 2018 12:52:21 +0200
From:   Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin.monnet@...ronome.com>, ast@...nel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-man@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next] bpf: document eBPF helpers and add a script to
 generate man page


> Am 09.04.2018 um 12:08 schrieb Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>:
[...]

>> May I completely misunderstood you, so correct my if I'am wrong:
>> 
>> - ./scripts/bpf_helpers_doc.py : produces reST markup from C-comments
>> - ./scripts/kerne-doc          : produces reST markup from C-comments
>> 
>> IMO: both are doing the same job, so why not using kernel-doc?
> 
> They are not really doing the same job, in bpf_helpers_doc.py case you don't
> want the whole header rendered, but just a fraction of it, that is, the
> single big comment which describes all BPF helper functions that a BPF
> program developer has available to use in user space - aka the entries in
> the __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER() macro;


> I also doubt the latter would actually qualify
> in kdoc context as some sort of a function description.

latter .. ah, OK .. thanks for clarifying. 

-- Markus --