netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces

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: <d7663e19-74d5-478d-becc-0a080075e7d6@roeck-us.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 08:40:05 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Maíra Canal <mcanal@...lia.com>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Daniel Diaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.org>,
	David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>,
	Arthur Grillo <arthurgrillo@...eup.net>,
	Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>,
	Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
	Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@...glegroups.com,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning
 backtraces

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 07:39:20PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
[ ... ]
> > > 
> > > Hi Guenter,
> > > 
> > > a minor nit from my side: this change results in a Kernel doc warning.
> > > 
> > >       .../bug.h:29: warning: expecting prototype for _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY(). Prototype was for HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION() instead
> > > 
> > > Perhaps either the new code should be placed above the Kernel doc,
> > > or scripts/kernel-doc should be enhanced?
> > > 
> > 
> > Thanks a lot for the feedback.
> > 
> > The definition block needs to be inside CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE,
> > so it would be a bit odd to move it above the documentation
> > just to make kerneldoc happy. I am not really sure that to do
> > about it.
> 
> FWIIW, I agree that would be odd.
> But perhaps the #ifdef could also move above the Kernel doc?
> Maybe not a great idea, but the best one I've had so far.
> 

I did that for the next version of the patch series. It is a bit more
clumsy, so I left it as separate patch on top of this patch. I'd
still like to get input from others before making the change final.

Thanks,
Guenter