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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c8715de7-674e-64e0-1e3b-4b4e884e80ad@netronome.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Apr 2018 14:33:02 +0100
From:   Quentin Monnet <quentin.monnet@...ronome.com>
To:     Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, 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

2018-04-09 12:52 UTC+0200 ~ Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>
> 
>> 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 --

As Daniel explained, kernel-doc does not apply in this case, we do not
have the full function prototype for eBPF helpers in the header file.
But to be honest, I didn't even realise kernel-doc was available and
could do something close to what I was looking for, so thanks for your
feedback! :)

Quentin