From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc: linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
workflows@vger.kernel.org, tools@kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@suse.cz>, Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
Jake Edge <jake@lwn.net>,
David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
Askar Safin <safinaskar@zohomail.com>,
Gabriele Paoloni <gpaoloni@redhat.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel/api: introduce kernel API specification framework
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 10:32:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <abq3f5vdcwRXGJGX@laps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87h5qe9wig.fsf@trenco.lwn.net>
On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 11:49:27AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
>So the reason for two completely separate mechanisms is not entirely
>clear to me. The kerneldoc variant is essentially documentation, while
>the macro stuff is to be built into the executable? What if you want
>both?
>
>It would be nice to only have one way if at all possible; I'm sure that
>crossed your mind at some point :) If there have to be two, having both
>examples describe the same function would make the parallels more clear.
Woops, I forgot to finish writing my reply to this :)
Under the hood, kerneldoc specs are translated into those macros so they could
be part of the build process and embedded into the resulting binary (both for
documentation as well as the runtime validation).
I don't think anyone would use the macro format directly, but as it's there
anyway I figured I'd offer it as an option. Would it make sense to just hide it
behind the scenes?
--
Thanks,
Sasha
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-18 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-13 15:09 [PATCH 0/9] Kernel API Specification Framework Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 1/9] kernel/api: introduce kernel API specification framework Sasha Levin
2026-03-17 17:49 ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-03-18 6:00 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2026-03-18 14:53 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-18 14:30 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-18 16:50 ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-03-18 14:32 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2026-03-18 16:51 ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 2/9] kernel/api: enable kerneldoc-based API specifications Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 3/9] kernel/api: add debugfs interface for kernel " Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:32 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-03-13 16:27 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 4/9] tools/kapi: Add kernel API specification extraction tool Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 5/9] kernel/api: add API specification for sys_open Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:33 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-03-13 16:42 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-17 18:37 ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-03-18 14:12 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-18 14:16 ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 6/9] kernel/api: add API specification for sys_close Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:49 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-03-13 16:46 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:52 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-03-13 16:55 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 7/9] kernel/api: add API specification for sys_read Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 8/9] kernel/api: add API specification for sys_write Sasha Levin
2026-03-13 15:09 ` [PATCH 9/9] kernel/api: add runtime verification selftest Sasha Levin
2026-03-14 18:18 ` [PATCH 0/9] Kernel API Specification Framework Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-14 22:44 ` David Laight
2026-03-15 6:46 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-15 6:36 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-18 6:24 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2026-03-18 14:14 ` Sasha Levin
2026-03-16 7:05 ` Dmitry Vyukov
2026-03-16 22:57 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-16 23:29 ` Sasha Levin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=abq3f5vdcwRXGJGX@laps \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=chrubis@suse.cz \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=gpaoloni@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jake@lwn.net \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=safinaskar@zohomail.com \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=tools@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=workflows@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox