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: <aEhSu56ePZ/QPHUW@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 08:43:55 -0700 From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org> To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org> Cc: Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Ignacio Encinas Rubio <ignacio@...cinas.com>, Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jan Stancek <jstancek@...hat.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Ruben Wauters <rubenru09@....com>, joel@...lfernandes.org, linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lkmm@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org, stern@...land.harvard.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] docs: netlink: store generated .rst files at Documentation/output Hello Mauro, On Tue, Jun 10, 2025 at 12:46:07PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > A better long term solution is to have an extension at > Documentation/sphinx that parses *.yaml files for netlink files, > which could internally be calling ynl_gen_rst.py. Yet, some care > needs to be taken, as yaml extensions are also used inside device > tree. In fact, This is very similar to what I did initially in v1. And I was creating a sphinx extension to handle the generation, have a look here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231103135622.250314-1-leitao@debian.org/ During the review, we agree to move out of the sphinx extension. the reasons are the stubs/templates that needs to be created and you are creating here. So, if we decide to come back to sphinx extension, we can leverage that code from v1 ?! > -def generate_main_index_rst(output: str) -> None: > +def generate_main_index_rst(output: str, index_dir: str, ) -> None: You probably don't need the last , before ). Other than that, LGTM. The question is, are we OK with the templates that need to be created for netlink specs?! Thanks for looking at it, --breno
Powered by blists - more mailing lists