From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F11293624C4; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 15:57:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768233433; cv=none; b=cNHNihvn+rVMkkRu5O5XndE/KeaR6OJWJ5lwN62wmc7yAqkCXlVnEBv3X/wwjuRHHY5Vpu2S/c4PljcmQP1foFVfslVXxqBPTPA5KPYNPahRicTn1t22zNz94+E9zC8VVsqN2HAzgtmrxLE/xwM/CsJbM+Qc4foWqTMM2resUoY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768233433; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xJkc9pMy5KlxcsaizX+CFnLRpiuY1uFbrRu83mdatPQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=IKRl4payedItIHmY3A1k7d0XIf1ohdA31ihLIcLEMieReULfhy8MSl70XIQsa9wMAx8MeqorN12Dq5pfC8lwCOKgBhD7lI+QItPDgK7fkUQ0LZHZzaEUXAoAkA6SPQ1aImNG4rF98l1WwCR5n2imY8W7wk2BMo9334h/60M4GEY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=PaP5MVym; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="PaP5MVym" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 86F6AC19423; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 15:57:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1768233432; bh=xJkc9pMy5KlxcsaizX+CFnLRpiuY1uFbrRu83mdatPQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=PaP5MVym/FieSUrb6oqiL3a4Y7ms7d+uoB3WuvwBU4vP2GdTrg49jxaxXmkHPPZE+ 8adeRObR2SAFKhFJbj0VuHz/iHaLPh8BciOJTx5xy7nwDgp+UkWFT9z47G1Cd637nD uSzXEytvZPJsKHCCp6ItHIa4w0KPcX8U9T95Frn529rCsNmLqWCszKMCINGBhEGNDo BRkaSJEuVouatnlctGA8/Jju3PYOmYCFvieT1FtMygIETvywIfuos/4FIQFS2Zzm9m +0TPBkcMWNpQBOs1g0nIXAbfKTh5jK14TLz/B/BnpLVqxsGLq6zaxlJKH/KDbwR4qH MO5evlce7573w== Received: from mchehab by mail.kernel.org with local (Exim 4.99) (envelope-from ) id 1vfKI2-00000000Kk7-2bfE; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:57:10 +0100 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:57:10 +0100 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: Jonathan Corbet Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linux Doc Mailing List , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jani Nikula Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] scripts/kernel-doc: ensure that comments are using our coding style Message-ID: References: <7604a45e8ade06994afeb68616cf1838dd1101ec.1768229902.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org> <878qe23kgv.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <878qe23kgv.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Sender: Mauro Carvalho Chehab On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 08:43:28AM -0700, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > Mauro Carvalho Chehab writes: > > > Along kernel-doc libs, we opted to have all comments starting/ending > > with a blank comment line. Use the same style here. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab > > --- > > scripts/kernel-doc.py | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/scripts/kernel-doc.py b/scripts/kernel-doc.py > > index 5d2f29e90ebe..7ccee4626478 100755 > > --- a/scripts/kernel-doc.py > > +++ b/scripts/kernel-doc.py > > @@ -197,7 +197,9 @@ def main(): > > parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(formatter_class=argparse.RawTextHelpFormatter, > > description=DESC) > > > > + # > > # Normal arguments > > + # > > > > parser.add_argument("-v", "-verbose", "--verbose", action="store_true", > > help="Verbose output, more warnings and other information.") > > [nit] I approve of this kind of change, but I would get rid of the extra > blank lines, just like we do with C code. Ok. FYI, this is mostly to preserve the same coding style everywhere, and we did a similar change at kdoc libs. At the initial versions of patch 2, I wrote a new comment about why we needed to avoid error code > 255. At v2, we're using a different approach, so no new comments are needed. > (I wouldn't redo the series just for this). Patch 4 depends on it, so what I can do - assuming that v2 doesn't need rebase - is to send you a new patch to drop it extra blank lines. Or, if this series needs another rebase, I'll fold such changes on it for the next version. > > Thanks, > > jon -- Thanks, Mauro