From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bjorn@mork.no (=?utf-8?Q?Bj=C3=B8rn_Mork?=) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 15:46:13 +0100 Subject: why is "const u32 (*tab)[256]" not kerneldoc-able? In-Reply-To: (Robert P. J. Day's message of "Tue, 3 Feb 2015 08:44:50 -0500 (EST)") References: <87fvanuo9h.fsf@nemi.mork.no> <87bnlbuncq.fsf@nemi.mork.no> Message-ID: <874mr3uk7e.fsf@nemi.mork.no> To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org List-Id: kernelnewbies.lists.kernelnewbies.org "Robert P. J. Day" writes: > actually, i just found where this is a known issue: > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-doc/msg09364.html Probably because it's a rare construct. But looking closer at this, trying to understand why the simple test using scripts/kernel-doc lib/crc32.c |man -l - seemed to sort of work, I found that your main problem isn't really the lack of kernel-doc support for array pointer parameters. It's a simple mismatch between the documented and the exported functions. scripts/docproc will only generate docs for exported symbols. lib/crc32.c has no documented *and* exported functions, and thats why the output is empty. The array pointer is a red herring. Bj?rn