Personally I like Jeff's text. There's zero need to overthink this.
Jul 20, 2023 7:30:34 PM Chuck Lever <cel@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 08:07:16AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Jeff Layton wrote:
>>> I got this today from modpost:
>>>
>>> WARNING: modpost: missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() in fs/nfsd/nfsd.o
>>>
>>> Add a module description.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
>>> index 1b8b1aab9a15..7070969a38b5 100644
>>> --- a/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
>>> +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsctl.c
>>> @@ -1626,6 +1626,7 @@ static void __exit exit_nfsd(void)
>>> }
>>>
>>> MODULE_AUTHOR("Olaf Kirch <okir@xxxxxxxxxxxx>");
>>> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("The Linux kernel NFS server");
>>
>> Of 9176 MODULE_DESCRIPTIONs in Linux, 21 start with "The ".
>> Does having that word add anything useful?
>> Amusingly 129 end with a period. I wonder what Jon Corbet would prefer
>> :-)
>
> The Ohio State University has set a bad precedent.
>
> I think we can drop "The".
>
>
>> A few tell us what the module does.
>> "Measures" "Provides"....
>> Do we want "Implements" ??
>
> I don't find "Implements" to be either conventional or illuminating.
>
>
>> 232 start "Driver " and 214 are "Driver for"....
>> Should we have "Server for" ??
>>
>> 26 start "Linux" ... which seems a bit redundant
>> 12 contain "for Linux". 67 mention linux in some way.
>> 28 contain the word "kernel" - also redundant.
>> Only three (others) mention "Linux kernel"
>
> One of which is the new in-kernel SMB server, interestingly.
>
> I don't think "Linux kernel" or even "in-kernel" is needed here.
> Both should be obvious from the context.
>
>
>> drivers/pcmcia/cs.c:MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Linux Kernel Card Services");
>> fs/ksmbd/server.c:MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Linux kernel CIFS/SMB SERVER");
>> fs/orangefs/orangefs-mod.c:MODULE_DESCRIPTION("The Linux Kernel VFS interface to ORANGEFS");
>>
>> hmmm.. 192 contain the word "module". Fortunately none say
>> "Linux kernel module for ..."
>> I would have found that to be a step too far.
>>
>> I'd like to suggest
>>
>> "Implements Server for NFS - v2, 3, v4.{0,1,2}"
>>
>> But that would require excessive #ifdef magic to get right.
>
> "Network File System server" works for me.
>
>
>> A small part of me wants to suggest:
>>
>> "nfsd"
>>
>> but maybe I'm just in a whimsical mood today.
>
> I'm resisting the urge to add "RFCs 1813, 7530, 8881, et al."
> Whimsy, indeed. ;-)
>
>
>> NeilBrown
>>
>>
>>> MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
>>> module_init(init_nfsd)
>>> module_exit(exit_nfsd)
>>> --
>>> 2.41.0
>>>
>>>
>>
