netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 07/24] ovpn: introduce the ovpn

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: <20240510172818.6111de74@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 17:28:18 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@...nvpn.net>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>, Paolo
 Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Esben
 Haabendal <esben@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 07/24] ovpn: introduce the ovpn_peer object

On Fri, 10 May 2024 20:57:33 +0200 Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> > I suspect it is more complex than that. checkpatch does not understand
> > kdoc. It just knows the rule that there should be a comment next to a
> > lock, hopefully indicating what the lock protects. In order to fix
> > this, checkpatch would need to somehow invoke the kdoc parser, and ask
> > it if the lock has kdoc documentation.
> > 
> > I suspect we are just going to have to live with this.  
> 
> since we are now requiring new code to always have kdoc, can't we just 
> drop the checkpatch warning?

I don't think we require kdoc, but I agree that the warning is rather
ineffective.