From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel-doc: better handle '::' sequences
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 14:35:57 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87tuosoov6.fsf@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210329185843.GK351017@casper.infradead.org>
On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 09:33:30PM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2021, Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:
>> > So here's my "modest proposal":
>> >
>> > - Similar to our ".. kernel-doc::" invocation in .rst files, handle
>> > ".. rustdoc::" (insert weeks of hacking here)
>> > - Now add ".. rst-doc::" which parses .c files like [1] kernel-doc
>> > does, but interprets a different style of comment and actually does
>> > most of the repetitive boring bits for you.
>>
>> As a hobby, I've written a Sphinx extension to use Clang to parse the
>> code and extract pure reStructuredText documentation comments with
>> minimal conversions [1]. No additional syntax. Just use reStructuredText
>> for everything instead of inventing your own.
>>
>> I'm not proposing to use that in kernel, at all. It was more like a
>> diversion from the kernel documentation.
>
> Actually, that looks like my proposal, except that it uses the same /**
> as kernel-doc, so you can't tell whether a comment is intended to be
> interpreted by kernel-doc or hawkmoth.
>
> https://github.com/jnikula/hawkmoth/blob/master/test/example-70-function.c
>
> If the introduction were "/*rST" instead of "/**", would we have
> consensus? It gives us a path to let people intermix kernel-doc and
> hawkmoth comments in the same file, which would be amazing.
If you want to allow two syntaxes for documentation comments (current
kernel-doc and pure reStructuredText with just the comment markers and
indentation removed) I think the natural first step would be to modify
kernel-doc the perl script to support that. It would probably even be
trivial.
Hawkmoth uses Clang for parsing, with none of the kernel specific stuff
that kernel-doc has, such as EXPORT_SYMBOL(). It makes sense for a pet
project with a clean break. I don't know if anyone has the bandwidth or
desire to re-implement the kernel specific stuff on top of Clang. (I
know I don't, I started the project because I wanted that clean break to
begin with!)
The real question is, is it a good idea to support multiple formats at
all? (N.b. I'm not a fan of extending the kernel-doc syntax either.)
BR,
Jani.
>
>> But based on my experience with the old and new kernel documentation
>> systems and the hobby one, the one takeaway is to not create new
>> syntaxes, grammars, parsers, or preprocessors to be maintained by the
>> kernel community. Just don't. Take what's working and supported by other
>> projects, and add the minimal glue using Sphinx extensions to put it
>> together, and no more.
>>
>> Of course, we couldn't ditch kernel-doc the script, but we managed to
>> trim it down quite a bit. OTOH, there have been a number of additions
>> outside of Sphinx in Makefiles and custom tools in various languages
>> that I'm really not happy about. It's all too reminiscient of the old
>> DocBook toolchain, while Sphinx was supposed to be the one tool to tie
>> it all together, partially chosen because of the extension support.
>>
>>
>> BR,
>> Jani.
>>
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/jnikula/hawkmoth
>>
>>
>> >
>> > For example, xa_load:
>> >
>> > /**
>> > * xa_load() - Load an entry from an XArray.
>> > * @xa: XArray.
>> > * @index: index into array.
>> > *
>> > * Context: Any context. Takes and releases the RCU lock.
>> > * Return: The entry at @index in @xa.
>> > */
>> > void *xa_load(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long index)
>> >
>> > //rST
>> > // Load an entry from an XArray.
>> > //
>> > // :Context: Any context. Takes and releases the RCU lock.
>> > // :Return: The entry in `xa` at `index`.
>> > void *xa_load(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long index)
>> >
>> > (more complex example below [2])
>> >
>> > Things I considered:
>> >
>> > - Explicitly document that this is rST markup instead of Markdown or
>> > whatever.
>> > - Don't repeat the name of the function. The tool can figure it out.
>> > - Don't force documenting each parameter. Often they are obvious
>> > and there's really nothing interesting to say about the parameter.
>> > Witness the number of '@foo: The foo' (of type struct foo) that we
>> > have scattered throughout the tree. It's not that the documenter is
>> > lazy, it's that there's genuinely nothing to say here.
>> > - Use `interpreted text` to refer to parameters instead of *emphasis* or
>> > **strong emphasis**. The tool can turn that into whatever markup
>> > is appropriate.
>> > - Use field lists for Context and Return instead of sections. The markup
>> > is simpler to use, and I think the rendered output is better.
>> >
>> > [1] by which i mean "in a completely different way from, but similar in
>> > concept"
>> >
>> > [2] More complex example:
>> >
>> > /**
>> > * xa_store() - Store this entry in the XArray.
>> > * @xa: XArray.
>> > * @index: Index into array.
>> > * @entry: New entry.
>> > * @gfp: Memory allocation flags.
>> > *
>> > * After this function returns, loads from this index will return @entry.
>> > * Storing into an existing multi-index entry updates the entry of every index.
>> > * The marks associated with @index are unaffected unless @entry is %NULL.
>> > *
>> > * Context: Any context. Takes and releases the xa_lock.
>> > * May sleep if the @gfp flags permit.
>> > * Return: The old entry at this index on success, xa_err(-EINVAL) if @entry
>> > * cannot be stored in an XArray, or xa_err(-ENOMEM) if memory allocation
>> > * failed.
>> > */
>> > void *xa_store(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long index, void *entry, gfp_t gfp)
>> >
>> > //rST
>> > // Store an entry in the XArray.
>> > //
>> > // After this function returns, loads from `index` will return `entry`.
>> > // Storing into an existing multi-index entry updates the entry of every index.
>> > // The marks associated with `index` are unaffected unless `entry` is ``NULL``.
>> > //
>> > // :Context: Any context. Takes and releases the xa_lock.
>> > // May sleep if the `gfp` flags permit.
>> > // :Return: The old entry at this index on success, xa_err(-EINVAL) if `entry`
>> > // cannot be stored in an XArray, or xa_err(-ENOMEM) if memory allocation
>> > // failed.
>> > void *xa_store(struct xarray *xa, unsigned long index, void *entry, gfp_t gfp)
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-30 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-25 16:47 [PATCH 0/8] dt: doc build improvements and kerneldoc addition Rob Herring
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 1/8] dt-bindings: Fix reference in submitting-patches.rst to the DT ABI doc Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:51 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 2/8] docs: dt: writing-schema: Remove spurious indentation Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:51 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 3/8] docs: dt: writing-schema: Include the example schema in the doc build Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:52 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 4/8] docs: dt: Make 'Devicetree' wording more consistent Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:25 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 5/8] docs: dt: Group DT docs into relevant sub-sections Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:52 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 6/8] of: Fix kerneldoc output formatting Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:46 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 18:14 ` [PATCH] kernel-doc: better handle '::' sequences Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 18:51 ` Jonathan Corbet
2021-03-25 19:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-03-25 21:04 ` Jonathan Corbet
2021-03-25 22:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-03-25 22:30 ` Jonathan Corbet
2021-03-29 14:42 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-03-29 18:33 ` Jani Nikula
2021-03-29 18:58 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-03-30 11:35 ` Jani Nikula [this message]
2021-03-30 12:43 ` Markus Heiser
2021-03-30 13:06 ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-03-29 19:34 ` kerneldoc and rust (was [PATCH] kernel-doc: better handle '::' sequences) Jonathan Corbet
2021-03-29 19:42 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-03-29 20:40 ` [PATCH] kernel-doc: better handle '::' sequences Miguel Ojeda
2021-03-30 11:07 ` Jani Nikula
2021-03-30 22:46 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 7/8] of: Add missing 'Return' section in kerneldoc comments Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:52 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-03-25 16:47 ` [PATCH 8/8] docs: dt: Add DT API documentation Rob Herring
2021-03-25 17:53 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87tuosoov6.fsf@intel.com \
--to=jani.nikula@linux.intel.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab+huawei@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).