Re: [PATCH] Security: Documentation: fix: `make htmldocs` warnings

[Jonathan Corbet]

On Mon,  6 Jul 2020 23:30:10 +0530
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Remove extra ')' after function name to fix warnings.
> It solves following warning :
> WARNING: Unparseable C cross-reference: 'groups_sort)'
> Invalid C declaration: Expected end of definition. [error at 11]
> 
> Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/security/credentials.rst | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/security/credentials.rst b/Documentation/security/credentials.rst
> index 282e79feee6a..d51e42b92395 100644
> --- a/Documentation/security/credentials.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/security/credentials.rst
> @@ -455,7 +455,7 @@ When replacing the group list, the new list must be sorted before it
>  is added to the credential, as a binary search is used to test for
>  membership.  In practice, this means :c:func:`groups_sort` should be
>  called before :c:func:`set_groups` or :c:func:`set_current_groups`.
> -:c:func:`groups_sort)` must not be called on a ``struct group_list`` which
> +:c:func:`groups_sort` must not be called on a ``struct group_list`` which
>  is shared as it may permute elements as part of the sorting process
>  even if the array is already sorted.

So this is a great fix, thanks for sending it.  That said, there are a
couple of ways in which this fix can be made even better:

 - The simpler of the two is to change the subject line of the patch.
   "Fix a warning" is almost never a good description of what you're
   doing; what you are actually doing is fixing a broken cross reference.
   So the subject line should say that.

 - In this case, though, there is a much better thing to do.  We
   deprecated the use of :c:func: around a year ago; the docs build system
   can now do the right thing automatically.  So a fix that would both
   eliminate the warning and improve the document as a whole would be to
   replace every instance of:

	:c:func:`function_name`

   with:

	function_name()

Is there any chance I could get you to send a patch that does that?

Thanks,

jon