| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzYd8Yp_CX52xYmbWg56JjyS__SmBD6Cb3y0M5hvVPYARw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:55:53 -0700
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
Cc: Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpftool: fix build failure
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 10:46 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 9/14/20 10:23 AM, Quentin Monnet wrote:
> > On 14/09/2020 17:54, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/14/20 9:46 AM, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 9/14/20 1:16 AM, Quentin Monnet wrote:
> >>>> On 14/09/2020 07:12, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >>>>> When building bpf selftests like
> >>>>> make -C tools/testing/selftests/bpf -j20
> >>>>> I hit the following errors:
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>> GEN
> >>>>> /net-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/build/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-gen.8
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <stdin>:75: (WARNING/2) Block quote ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> <stdin>:71: (WARNING/2) Literal block ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> <stdin>:85: (WARNING/2) Literal block ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> <stdin>:57: (WARNING/2) Block quote ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> <stdin>:66: (WARNING/2) Literal block ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> <stdin>:109: (WARNING/2) Literal block ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> <stdin>:175: (WARNING/2) Literal block ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> <stdin>:273: (WARNING/2) Literal block ends without a blank line;
> >>>>> unexpected unindent.
> >>>>> make[1]: ***
> >>>>> [/net-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/build/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-perf.8]
> >>>>> Error 12
> >>>>> make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> >>>>> make[1]: ***
> >>>>> [/net-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/build/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-iter.8]
> >>>>> Error 12
> >>>>> make[1]: ***
> >>>>> [/net-next/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/build/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-struct_ops.8]
> >>>>> Error 12
> >>>>> ...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am using:
> >>>>> -bash-4.4$ rst2man --version
> >>>>> rst2man (Docutils 0.11 [repository], Python 2.7.5, on linux2)
> >>>>> -bash-4.4$
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Looks like that particular version of rst2man prefers to have a
> >>>>> blank line
> >>>>> after literal blocks. This patch added block lines in related .rst
> >>>>> files
> >>>>> and compilation can then pass.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cc: Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>
> >>>>> Fixes: 18841da98100 ("tools: bpftool: Automate generation for "SEE
> >>>>> ALSO" sections in man pages")
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Yonghong, thanks for the fix! I didn't see those warnings on my
> >>>> setup. For the record my rst2man version is:
> >>>>
> >>>> rst2man (Docutils 0.16 [release], Python 3.8.2, on linux)
> >>>>
> >>>> Your patch looks good, but instead of having blank lines at the end of
> >>>> most files, could you please check if the following works?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for the tip! I looked at the generated output again. My above
> >>> fix can silent the warning, but certainly not correct.
> >>>
> >>> With the following change, I captured the intermediate result of the
> >>> .rst file.
> >>>
> >>> ifndef RST2MAN_DEP
> >>> $(error "rst2man not found, but required to generate man pages")
> >>> endif
> >>> - $(QUIET_GEN)( cat $< ; echo -n $(call see_also,$<) ) | rst2man
> >>> $(RST2MAN_OPTS) > $@
> >>> + $(QUIET_GEN)( cat $< ; echo -n $(call see_also,$<) ) | tee
> >>> /tmp/tt | rst2man $(RST2MAN_OPTS) > $@
> >>>
> >>> With below command,
> >>> make clean && make bpftool-cgroup.8
> >>> I can get the new .rst file for bpftool-cgroup.
> >>>
> >>> At the end of file /tmp/tt (changed bpftool-cgroup.rst), I see
> >>>
> >>> ID AttachType AttachFlags Name
> >>> \n SEE ALSO\n========\n\t**bpf**\ (2),\n\t**bpf-helpers**\
> >>> (7),\n\t**bpftool**\ (8),\n\t**bpftool-btf**\
> >>> (8),\n\t**bpftool-feature**\ (8),\n\t**bpftool-gen**\
> >>> (8),\n\t**bpftool-iter**\ (8),\n\t**bpftool-link**\
> >>> (8),\n\t**bpftool-map**\ (8),\n\t**bpftool-net**\
> >>> (8),\n\t**bpftool-perf**\ (8),\n\t**bpftool-prog**\
> >>> (8),\n\t**bpftool-struct_ops**\ (8)\n
> >>>
> >>> This sounds correct if we rst2man can successfully transforms '\n'
> >>> or '\t' to proper encoding in the man page.
> >>>
> >>> Unfortunately, with my version of rst2man, I got
> >>>
> >>> .IP "System Message: WARNING/2 (<stdin>:, line 146)"
> >>> Literal block ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
> >>> .sp
> >>> n SEE
> >>> ALSOn========nt**bpf**(2),nt**bpf\-helpers**(7),nt**bpftool**(8),nt**bpftool\-btf**(8),nt**bpftool\-feature**(8),nt**bpftool\-gen**(8),nt**bpftool\-iter**(8),nt**bpftool\-link**(8),nt**bpftool\-map**(8),nt**bpftool\-net**(8),nt**bpftool\-perf**(8),nt**bpftool\-prog**(8),nt**bpftool\-struct_ops**(8)n
> >>>
> >>> .\" Generated by docutils manpage writer.
> >>>
> >>> The rst2man simply considered \n as 'n'. The same for '\t' and
> >>> this caused the issue.
> >>>
> >>> I did not find a way to fix the problem https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.google.com_url-3Fq-3Dhttps-3A__zoom.us_j_94864957378-3Fpwd-253DbXFRL1ZaRUxTbDVKcm9uRitpTXgyUT09-26sa-3DD-26source-3Dcalendar-26ust-3D1600532408208000-26usg-3DAOvVaw3SJ0i8oz4ZM-2DGRb7hYkrYlyet&d=DwIDaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=kEK7ScPMF-y-i8dli-or8wWEGREW5V4qPB7UqHqDnkg&s=Br0g0MFXxL_pJuDVTOY5UrmvfD2ru_6Uf_X_8Nr2Rhk&e= .
> >>
> >> The following change works for me.
> >>
> >> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ $(OUTPUT)%.8: %.rst
> >> ifndef RST2MAN_DEP
> >> $(error "rst2man not found, but required to generate man pages")
> >> endif
> >> - $(QUIET_GEN)( cat $< ; echo -n $(call see_also,$<) ) | rst2man
> >> $(RST2MAN_OPTS) > $@
> >> + $(QUIET_GEN)( cat $< ; echo -e $(call see_also,$<) ) | rst2man
> >> $(RST2MAN_OPTS) > $@
> >>
> >> clean: helpers-clean
> >> $(call QUIET_CLEAN, Documentation)
> >> -bash-4.4$
> >>
> >> I will send revision 2 shortly.
> >
> > Thanks Yonghong, but this does not work on my setup :/. The version of
> > echo which is called on my machine from the Makefile does not seem to
> > interpret the "-e" option and writes something like "-e\nSEE ALSO",
> > which causes rst2man to complain.
> >
> > I suspect the portable option here would be printf, even though Andrii
> > had some concerns that we could pass a format specifier through the file
> > names [0].
> >
> > Would this work on your setup?
> >
> > $(QUIET_GEN)( cat $< ; printf $(call see_also,$<) ) | rst2man...
> >
> > Would that be acceptable?
>
> It works for me. Andrii originally suggested `echo -e`, but since `echo
> -e` does not work in your environment let us use printf then. I will add
> a comment about '%' in the bpftool man page name.
It's amazing how incompatible echo can be. But that aside, I have
nothing against printf itself, but:
printf "%s" "whatever we want to print out"
seems like the way to go, similarly how you'd do it in your C code, no?
>
> >
> > [0]
> > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ca595fd6-e807-ac8e-f15f-68bfc7b7dbc4@isovalent.com/T/#m01bb298fd512121edd5e77a26ed5382c0c53939e
> >
> > Quentin
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists