netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 5/8] net: fou: regenerate the uAPI from the spec

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230124164007.6e2e67c9@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 24 Jan 2023 16:40:07 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        Alexander Lobakin <alexandr.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, robh@...nel.org, stephen@...workplumber.org,
        ecree.xilinx@...il.com, sdf@...gle.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        fw@...len.de, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, razor@...ckwall.org,
        nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 5/8] net: fou: regenerate the uAPI from the
 spec

On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 19:50:40 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-01-24 at 18:49 +0100, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> > From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> > Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 09:50:38 -0800
> >   
> > > Regenerate the FOU uAPI header from the YAML spec.
> > > 
> > > The flags now come before attributes which use them,
> > > and the comments for type disappear (coders should look
> > > at the spec instead).  
> > 
> > Sorry I missed the whole history of this topic. Wanted to ask: if we can
> > generate these headers and even C files, why ship the generated with the
> > source code and not generate them during building? Or it's slow and/or
> > requires some software etc.?
> 
> Currently it requires python 3 (3.6+, I'd think?).
> 
> Python is currently not documented as a build requirement in
> Documentation/process/changes.rst afaict.

Yes, I wanted to avoid bundling in changes which could be controversial.
Whether code is generated during build or committed is something we can
revisit at any point.