Re: RFC: Adding arch-specific user ABI documentation in linux-man
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2020-05-05 12:14:36
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-man
On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 12:05:19PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 11:44:55AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:quoted
Hi Dave, On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 04:32:35PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:quoted
I considering trying to plug some gaps in the arch-specific ABI documentation in the linux man-pages, specifically for arm64 (and possibly arm, where compat means we have some overlap). For arm64, there are now significant new extensions (Pointer authentication, SVE, MTE etc.) Currently there is some user-facing documentation mixed in with the kernel-facing documentation in the kernel tree, but this situation isn't ideal. Do you have an opinion on where in the man-pages documentation should be added, and how to structure it? Affected areas include: * exec interface * aux vector, hwcaps * arch-specific signals * signal frame * mmap/mprotect extensions * prctl calls * ptrace quirks and extensions * coredump contents Not everything has an obvious home in an existing page, and adding specifics for every architecture could make some existing manpages very unwieldy. I think for some arch features, we really need some "overview" pages too: just documenting the low-level details is of limited value without some guide as to how to use them together. Does the following sketch look reasonable? * man7/arm64.7: new page: overview of arm64-specific ABI extensions * man7/sve.7 (or man7/arm64-sve.7 or man7/sve.7arm64): new page: overview of arm64 SVE ABI * man2/arm64-ptrace.2 (or man2/ptrace.2arm64): new page: arm64 ptrace extensionsMichael has been nagging me on and off about that for, what, 10 years now? I would therefore be very much in favour of having our ptrace extensions documented! We could even put this stuff under Documentation/arm64/man/ if it's deemed too CPU-specific for the man-pages project, but my preference would still be for it to be hosted there alongside all the other man pages.Heh, perhaps we could build that into the kernel and mount it somewhere.
Argh, don't joke too loudly about things like that!
Seriously though, I guess I can start off with straightforward small things for which the documentation has an obvious home (like prctls[*]) and then move on to the bigger stuff like ptrace. If people start shouting about a page getting too big or messy I can try to split it up. Make sense?
Sure, works for me. Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel