netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 00/24] Introducing OpenVPN Data Channel Offload

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: <20240508175327.31bf47a3@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 17:53:27 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@...nvpn.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>, Paolo
 Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew@...n.ch>, Esben Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 00/24] Introducing OpenVPN Data Channel
 Offload

On Wed, 8 May 2024 11:56:45 +0200 Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> I see there is one warning to fix due to a typ0 (eventS_wq vs event_wq), 
> but I also get more warnings like this:
> 
> drivers/net/ovpn/peer.h:119: warning: Function parameter or struct 
> member 'vpn_addrs' not described in 'ovpn_peer'
> 
> However vpn_addrs is an anonymous struct within struct ovpn_peer.
> I have already documented all its members using the form:
> 
> @vpn_addrs.ipv4
> @vpn_addrs.ipv6
> 
> Am I expected to document the vpn_addrs as well?
> Or is this a false positive?

I think we need to trust the script on what's expected. 
The expectations around documenting anonymous structs may have 
changed recently, I remember fixing this in my code, too.

BTW make sure you use -Wall, people started sending trivial
patches to fix those :S Would be best not to add new ones.