[PATCH v9 3/8] IMA: define a hook to measure kernel integrity critical data

[Mimi Zohar]

On Tue, 2021-01-05 at 12:01 -0800, Tushar Sugandhi wrote:
> 
> >> data. However, various data structures, policies, and states
> > 
> > Here and everywhere else, there are two blanks after a period.
> > 
> I checked this patch file in multiple text editors, but couldn’t find
> any instance of period followed by two spaces. I will double check again 
> all the patches for multiple spaces, and remove them if any.

There should be two blanks after a period, not one blank.

<snip>

> >> + *
> >> + * Measure the kernel subsystem data, critical to the integrity of the kernel,
> >> + * into the IMA log and extend the @pcr.
> >> + *
> >> + * Use @event_name to describe the state/buffer data change.
> >> + * Examples of critical data (@buf) could be various data structures,
> >> + * policies, and states stored in kernel memory that can impact the integrity
> >> + * of the system.
> >> + *
> >> + * If @measure_buf_hash is set to true - measure hash of the buffer data,
> >> + * else measure the buffer data itself.
> >> + * @measure_buf_hash can be used to save space, if the data being measured
> >> + * is too large.
> >> + *
> >> + * The data (@buf) can only be measured, not appraised.
> > 
> > The "/**" is the start of kernel-doc.  Have you seen anywhere else in
> My impression was the hooks in ima_main.c e.g. ima_file_free()
> ima_file_mmap() required the double-asterisk ("/**"), and internal
> functions like ima_rdwr_violation_check() require a single-asterisk
> ("/*")
> 
> kernel-doc.rst suggest the double-asterisk ("/**") for function comment
> as well.
> 
> Function documentation
> ----------------------
> 
> The general format of a function and function-like macro kernel-doc 
> comment is::
> 
>    /**
>     * function_name() - Brief description of function.
> 
> Please let me know if you still want me to remove the double-asterisk
> ("/**") here.

Yes, of course this needs to be kernel-doc and requires "/**"

> 
> > the kernel using the @<variable name> in the longer function
> > description?  Have you seen this style of longer   function
> > description?  Refer to Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst and other
> > code for examples.
> > 
> Thanks. I will remove the prefix "@" from <variable name> in the longer 
> function description.

Removing the @<variable name> isn't sufficient.  Please look at other
examples of longer function definitions before reposting.

thanks,

Mimi