From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34326 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PlGcq-0002Wh-BB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:02:41 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PlGcp-0001Ot-8M for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:02:40 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:30250) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PlGcp-0001Oe-1U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:02:39 -0500 From: Markus Armbruster Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH REBASE/RESEND 0/4] Auto-document qdev devices References: Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 09:02:22 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Amit Shah's message of "Fri, 4 Feb 2011 11:48:45 +0530") Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Amit Shah Cc: qemu list Amit Shah writes: > Hello, > > This is yet another rebase of the patchset I'd sent earlier. > > The usual notes apply: this is just the start, just getting the > framework in place and a few examples so that people can then pick up > and start documenting their devices and options. We want to see all > of the devices covered, and hopefully turn on build_bug_on() on an > empty doc string. > > Maintainers should perhaps also look for patches that introduce > options without documentation. > > That's the long-term goal (0.15-final). For short-term, I'll be > preparing follow-on patches that add doc strings for a few more > options and perhaps bug people based on git history as to what > documentation is to be added for some options. Also to incorporate > Markus's comments on beautifying output. > > The earlier this patchset goes in the better since it'll reduce > conflicts and rebases needed. > > If this looks acceptable, please apply! As long as Amit keeps rebasing his patches, I'll keep resending my comment (it does get old, though): This has been stuck since forever. No idea why, it's neither hairy nor controversial. Quoting from my review of v2(?) last September: For QMP, we'll need to cover more than just device properties, and in more detail than just a help text, but this looks like a sensible step forward. I'm fine with committing it as is. We can polish in follow-up commits.