Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] LSM Documentation - Render lsm_hooks.h for kernel_docs

[Richard Haines <richard_c_haines@btinternet.com>]

On Tue, 2021-04-13 at 14:01 -0500, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 09:42:01PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 9:40 AM Richard Haines
> > <richard_c_haines@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > This patch series updates the LSM hook text defined in the
> > > comments
> > > section of inlcude/linux/lsm_hooks.h. This enables the hook
> > > functions to
> > > be rendered in kernel_docs html or pdf format.
> > > 
> > > Note that no text has been changed in lsm_hooks.h, only
> > > formatting
> > > to render the text.
> > > 
> > > To get the correct rendering some lines have exceeded checkpatch
> > > limits and
> > > therefore has a moan. The function statements seem to need being
> > > a
> > > continuous line. The others can be split, but decided not to.
> > > Any better ideas ??
> > > 
> > > The hook functions render in HTML ok, however in PDF format the
> > > only issue
> > > is that the long function definitions do not wrap and therefore
> > > truncated.
> > > Check the 'int sb_mount(const char *dev_name' entry in:
> > > Documentation/output/pdf/security.pdf
> > > 
> > > For reference two hooks have been marked as deprecated:
> > > sb_copy_data() and
> > > sb_parse_opts_str()
> > > 
> > > Tested using 'make pdfdocs' and 'make htmldocs'
> > > 
> > > Richard Haines (3):
> > >   Documentation/security: Update LSM security hook text
> > >   include/linux: Update LSM hook text part1
> > >   include/linux: Update LSM hook text part2
> > > 
> > >  Documentation/security/lsm-development.rst |    5 +-
> > >  include/linux/lsm_hooks.h                  | 2365 +++++++++++---
> > > ------
> > >  2 files changed, 1364 insertions(+), 1006 deletions(-)
> > 
> > I haven't yet pulled this patchset to generate the HTML/PDF docs,
> > but
> > just looking at the comments themselves it looks reasonable to me
> > ...
> > and I say this as being perhaps one of the stricter folks under
> > security/ when it comes to 80 character line lengths :)  In my
> > opinion, the benefit of being able to render the docs nicely
> > outweigh
> > the pain of scrolling horizontally in my editor.  Thanks for doing
> > this Richard.
> > 
> > Does anyone else have any thoughts on these changes?
> 
> No objection from me.

Thanks for the comments, I'll rebuild on 5.12-rc7 and resubmit as a
patch.