From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: kernel-doc overly verbose with V=0
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 13:37:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9367d899-53af-4d9c-9320-22fc4dbadca5@intel.com> (raw)
Hi,
I recently saw some strange behavior with the Python kernel-doc. I was
seeing the verbose info lines from the kernel-doc script, i.e.:
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5377 Scanning doc for function ice_cgu_get_pin_freq_supp
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5406 Scanning doc for function ice_cgu_get_pin_name
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5441 Scanning doc for function ice_cgu_state_to_name
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5463 Scanning doc for function ice_get_dpll_ref_sw_status
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5505 Scanning doc for function ice_set_dpll_ref_sw_status
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5544 Scanning doc for function ice_get_cgu_state
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5612 Scanning doc for function ice_get_cgu_rclk_pin_info
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5671 Scanning doc for function ice_cgu_get_output_pin_state_caps
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5733 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_lock
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5770 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_unlock
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5782 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_init_hw
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5811 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_write_port_cmd
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5834 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_one_port_cmd
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5866 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_port_cmd
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5901 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_tmr_cmd
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5934 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_init_time
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:5986 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_write_incval
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6035 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_write_incval_locked
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6056 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_adj_clock
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6107 Scanning doc for function ice_read_phy_tstamp
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6134 Scanning doc for function ice_clear_phy_tstamp
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6164 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_reset_ts_memory
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6183 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_init_phc
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6215 Scanning doc for function ice_get_phy_tx_tstamp_ready
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6247 Scanning doc for function ice_check_phy_tx_tstamp_ready
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6273 Scanning doc for function ice_ptp_config_sfd
> Info: ice_ptp_hw.c:6293 Scanning doc for function refsync_pin_id_valid
I didn't understand why I was seeing this as it should only be happening
if running kernel-doc in verbose mode. Then I discovered I had set
KBUILD_VERBOSE=0 in my environment.
The python kernel-doc implementation reads this in the __init__ for
KernelFiles() on line 165:
> if not verbose:
> verbose = bool(os.environ.get("KBUILD_VERBOSE", 0))
After some debugging, I realized this reads KBUILD_VERBOSE as a string,
then converts it to a boolean using python's standard rules, so "0"
becomes true, which enables the verbose output.
This is in contrast to the (now removed) kernel-doc.pl script which
checked the value for a 1:
> if (defined($ENV{'KBUILD_VERBOSE'}) && $ENV{'KBUILD_VERBOSE'} =~ '1')
The same behavior happens if you assign V=0 on the command line or to
any other non-empty string, since when V is set on the command line it
sets KBUILD_VERBOSE.
Of course, I can remove KBUILD_VERBOSE from my environment, I'm not
entirely sure when or why I added it.
Would think it would make sense to update the kdoc_files.py script to
check and interpret the string value the same way the perl script used
to? It seems reasonable to me that users might set "V=0" thinking that
it disables the verbosity. Other verbosity checks are based on the
string containing a 1, (some even use 2 for even more printing).
I'm not entirely sure what the best implementation for python is to
avoid this misinterpretation, so I haven't drafted a proper patch yet.
Thanks,
Jake
next reply other threads:[~2026-03-24 20:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-24 20:37 Jacob Keller [this message]
2026-03-25 11:50 ` kernel-doc overly verbose with V=0 Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2026-03-25 20:42 ` Jacob Keller
2026-03-27 6:11 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2026-03-27 18:32 ` Jacob Keller
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=9367d899-53af-4d9c-9320-22fc4dbadca5@intel.com \
--to=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab+huawei@kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.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