From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Vetter Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Documentation: drm: describing drm properties exposed by various drivers Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 10:58:27 +0200 Message-ID: <20140512085827.GD25056@phenom.ffwll.local> References: <1394016990-5218-1-git-send-email-sagar.a.kamble@intel.com> <2919182.UBDg5nOr7Z@avalon> <1394622965.18918.12.camel@sagar-desktop> <3136468.2PAlK4Gq8k@avalon> <20140510103937.GC18465@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Dave Airlie Cc: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= , Laurent Pinchart , Laurent Pinchart , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Vetter , intel-gfx , dri-devel , "Purushothaman, Vijay A" , Rob Landley , Alex Deucher , Dave Airlie , Sagar Arun Kamble List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 06:24:57PM +1000, Dave Airlie wrote: > >> > >> If we decide to go for property documentation inside the source code then I > >> believe we'll have to create our own format, as creating a properties table > >> from kerneldoc information extracted from comments is probably not possible. > > > > Can comeone pick up the ball here and figure out what needs to be done? > > > > The reason why I want a central place for the documentation is to force > > people to collaborate outside their own sandbox when adding properties. > > Whether that's docbook or some text file I don't care so much at this > > point. The fact that it's a central place should mandate that the > > patches changing it will go through dri-devel and so everyone should se > > them, and when adding new properties it would make the patch author more > > likely to look around a bit before adding another slighty incompatible > > version of the same property. If someone has a better suggestion how to > > encforce this I'm all ears. > > > > Of course this idea can still fail if our esteemed maintainer merges > > stuff without checking for violations of this policy. Dave, any thoughts > > on the subject? > > Yeah I'm happy to block merging stuff, if we can spot new properties > when stuff is posted on dri-devel, so much the better, > > most drivers still send everything via dri-devel anyways, its only > really Intel I have to worry about so far, I'll enforce that all prop stuff gets cc: dri-devel and that it has updates for the prop docs. > But we should definitely add it to the new driver review checklist as well. > > I'm also on the side of this patch is ugly and makes my eyes burn, > please please get a plan to use something else ASAP, I'm willing to > merge this but I'm tempted to give it a lifetime of a kernel or two > before I burn it. Ok, I'll try to move "make kerneldoc suck less" up the task list and maybe find someone to do it for me internally ;-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch