Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] scripts: kernel-doc: fix macro handling in enums

[Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>]

Pavan Kumar Linga <pavan.kumar.linga@intel.com> writes:

> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h uses offsetof to
> initialize the enum enumerators:
>
> enum {
> 	IDPF_BASE_CAPS = -1,
> 	IDPF_CSUM_CAPS = offsetof(struct virtchnl2_get_capabilities,
> 				  csum_caps),
> 	IDPF_SEG_CAPS = offsetof(struct virtchnl2_get_capabilities,
> 				 seg_caps),
> 	IDPF_RSS_CAPS = offsetof(struct virtchnl2_get_capabilities,
> 				 rss_caps),
> 	IDPF_HSPLIT_CAPS = offsetof(struct virtchnl2_get_capabilities,
> 				    hsplit_caps),
> 	IDPF_RSC_CAPS = offsetof(struct virtchnl2_get_capabilities,
> 				 rsc_caps),
> 	IDPF_OTHER_CAPS = offsetof(struct virtchnl2_get_capabilities,
> 				   other_caps),
> };
>
> kernel-doc parses the above enumerator with a ',' inside the
> macro and treats 'csum_caps', 'seg_caps' etc. also as enumerators
> resulting in the warnings:
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h:130: warning: Enum value
> 'csum_caps' not described in enum 'idpf_cap_field'
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h:130: warning: Enum value
> 'seg_caps' not described in enum 'idpf_cap_field'
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h:130: warning: Enum value
> 'rss_caps' not described in enum 'idpf_cap_field'
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h:130: warning: Enum value
> 'hsplit_caps' not described in enum 'idpf_cap_field'
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h:130: warning: Enum value
> 'rsc_caps' not described in enum 'idpf_cap_field'
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf.h:130: warning: Enum value
> 'other_caps' not described in enum 'idpf_cap_field'
>
> Fix it by removing the macro arguments within the parentheses.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pavan Kumar Linga <pavan.kumar.linga@intel.com>
> ---
>  scripts/kernel-doc | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/kernel-doc b/scripts/kernel-doc
> index cfb1cb223508..bc008f30f3c9 100755
> --- a/scripts/kernel-doc
> +++ b/scripts/kernel-doc
> @@ -1353,6 +1353,7 @@ sub dump_enum($$) {
>  	my %_members;
>  
>  	$members =~ s/\s+$//;
> +	$members =~ s/\(.*?[\)]//g;

".*" matches the empty string, so * think the "?" is unnecessary.

I do worry that this regex could match more than expected, disappearing
everything up to a final parenthesis.  It doesn't cause any changes in
the current docs build, but still ... How do you feel about replacing
".*" with "[^;]*" ?

Thanks,

jon