* Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 04:43:58PM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > This comment relates to the "why" for the code itself (and its poor > > confused developers), taking all the RSB-related vulnerabilities into > > account. > > So use Documentation/arch/x86/. > > This is exactly the reason why we need more "why" documentation - because > everytime we have to swap the whole bugs.c horror back in, we're poor confused > developers. And we have the "why" spread out across commit messages and other > folklore which means everytime we have to change stuff, the git archeology > starts. :-\ "err, do you remember why we're doing this?!" And so on > converstaions on IRC. > > So having an implementation document explaining clearly why we did things is > long overdue. > > But it's fine - I can move it later when the dust settles here. I think in-line documentation is better in this case: the primary defense against mistakes and misunderstandings is in the source code itself. And "it's too long" is an argument *against* moving it out into some obscure place 99% of developers aren't even aware of... Thanks, Ingo
