Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] security: <linux/lsm_hooks.h>: fix all kernel-doc warnings | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Date | Tue, 18 Feb 2020 11:30:40 -0800 |
| |
On 2/18/20 6:03 AM, Stephen Smalley wrote: > On 2/16/20 2:08 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> >> >> Fix all kernel-doc warnings in <linux/lsm_hooks.h>. >> Fixes the following warnings: >> >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'quotactl' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'quota_on' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'sb_free_mnt_opts' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'sb_eat_lsm_opts' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'sb_kern_mount' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'sb_show_options' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'sb_add_mnt_opt' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'd_instantiate' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'getprocattr' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'setprocattr' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'locked_down' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'perf_event_open' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'perf_event_alloc' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'perf_event_free' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'perf_event_read' not described in 'security_list_options' >> ../include/linux/lsm_hooks.h:1830: warning: Function parameter or member 'perf_event_write' not described in 'security_list_options' >> >> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> >> Cc: John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com> >> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> >> Cc: Micah Morton <mortonm@chromium.org> >> Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> >> Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com> >> Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org >> Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> >> Cc: Stephen Smalley <sds@tycho.nsa.gov> >> Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@parisplace.org> >> Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> >> Cc: Kentaro Takeda <takedakn@nttdata.co.jp> >> Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp> >> --- >> Notes: >> a. The location for some of these might need to be modified. >> b. 'locked_down' was just missing a final ':'. >> c. Added a new section: Security hooks for perf events. >> >> include/linux/lsm_hooks.h | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> --- lnx-56-rc1.orig/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h >> +++ lnx-56-rc1/include/linux/lsm_hooks.h >> @@ -136,6 +140,10 @@ >> * @sb superblock being remounted >> * @data contains the filesystem-specific data. >> * Return 0 if permission is granted. >> + * @sb_kern_mount: >> + * Mount this @sb if allowed by permissions. >> + * @sb_show_options: >> + * Show (print on @m) mount options for this @sb. >> * @sb_umount: >> * Check permission before the @mnt file system is unmounted. >> * @mnt contains the mounted file system. > > Thanks for doing this. Note that some of the existing kernel-doc comments for these hooks include a separate line describing each parameter (not just embedded in the function description) and a line describing the return value. Is that optional for kernel-doc? Obviously what you have added here is an improvement, just wondering whether it suffices or needs further augmentation.
Hi Stephen,
The additional kernel-doc comments that you refer to are obviously Good to Have, but they are not required. I didn't feel comfortable or qualified to add all of that info, but if anyone wants to help/contribute, please do so.
thanks. -- ~Randy
| |