Re: [PATCH] docs: kdoc: fix duplicate section warning message

[Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2053 bytes --]



On 10/30/2025 9:54 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com> writes:
> 
>> The python version of the kernel-doc parser emits some strange warnings
>> with just a line number in certain cases:
>>
>> $ ./scripts/kernel-doc -Wall -none 'include/linux/virtio_config.h'
>> Warning: 174
>> Warning: 184
>> Warning: 190
>> Warning: include/linux/virtio_config.h:226 No description found for return value of '__virtio_test_bit'
>> Warning: include/linux/virtio_config.h:259 No description found for return value of 'virtio_has_feature'
>> Warning: include/linux/virtio_config.h:283 No description found for return value of 'virtio_has_dma_quirk'
>> Warning: include/linux/virtio_config.h:392 No description found for return value of 'virtqueue_set_affinity'
>>
>> I eventually tracked this down to the lone call of emit_msg() in the
>> KernelEntry class, which looks like:
>>
>>   self.emit_msg(self.new_start_line, f"duplicate section name '{name}'\n")
>>
>> This looks like all the other emit_msg calls. Unfortunately, the definition
>> within the KernelEntry class takes only a message parameter and not a line
>> number. The intended message is passed as the warning!
>>
>> Pass the filename to the KernelEntry class, and use this to build the log
>> message in the same way as the KernelDoc class does.
> 
> So I would like to thrash the logging more thoroughly in a number of
> ways.  Having separate log() and warn() functions would be a good start.
> 

I do agree the current situation is a bit messy. But I'll leave
improving that up to those more involved in maintaining the tool.

> Failing that, though, this looks to me like a reasonable fix.
> 

Great.

> However: it doesn't apply to docs-next.  I can try to make a version
> that does in the next day or three, but if you could respin it against
> the current docs, that would be great...?
> 

Hm. I was able to apply it cleanly yesterday. I will send a v2 based on
docs-next this afternoon.

> Thanks,
> 
> jon


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]