From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.12]) (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 3BDEF3E8C52; Wed, 4 Feb 2026 10:39:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770201569; cv=none; b=BK1FYZipX1ZfCsUtKUVPncJ8egVBWS27Opcl+ifvy6GQRo2KQxE8iRyhhAz4YmYR9dlTsnImqGXw+xmeTtRSjyj4yTQEY+c9gEXkmR119ruDWsThaCQ0iQZwNsmTraC/if2upgbQM00GqKBvkBhYItuBSr0kS1HCyO19Y/podyQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770201569; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vo4WwGmhf6OpzG9zCzVL7qY/pjFyhwTho854s4f44Bo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=RZW4edYdqCzmLnqZzSiCQomWFxpYHlNJtlxB6mDDc4JJlE7+FI7X5sC5KnyASXoEgGVpFzEmmfNUuhjLbycZBSVMVjESdoYagU0C3KgyYzQEQFOXUadStB9jEp8jGbgpGMZA8wokfG8sqsIdI0TE6eFyzhAv56AtiR4+gXw8cPM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=f0XqCq8j; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="f0XqCq8j" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1770201569; x=1801737569; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=vo4WwGmhf6OpzG9zCzVL7qY/pjFyhwTho854s4f44Bo=; b=f0XqCq8jS+hL+Y3fVXF44N4TEeFADiBk949wdjWza0eJKVVIgToivZLm 8vJBzM75FOnuc4PiaLDVS05zPhCmQfxLwzpZaqumUU9R7cts0B5OzO1z0 nrx6coiVJj9XWQnCfFcw1jYDX37CbP7U3ZwXCRWqx3ctrfSMWbnRDz3Lj gZyqI66F2/ub8o0Ri9Lp5t+6ySgk3osZmhfAUwYl6N9AMV9pdQYIKbYqJ 2Pp3eozjZ8+EEAC41MOHkhf4OhsB+NkkfhuzfF+R8epaSe195fKrse7+X MChagIpCuYS9nDdkpCe46JH5yNaFxVaBVZH/zWkifP+EmZ4+jqcmDuUFo Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: SmxHKrslRN+ocDJGKbg7Uw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: iqUujCucQLqlE91Tcg78LQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11691"; a="75240971" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,272,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="75240971" Received: from orviesa005.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.145]) by fmvoesa106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Feb 2026 02:39:29 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: tDzMGhejSXSgzsp2k0AdEw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: YSd8FQeGQJ60LYuoxo4YOw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.21,272,1763452800"; d="scan'208";a="215107780" Received: from fdefranc-mobl3.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.246.7]) by orviesa005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Feb 2026 02:39:25 -0800 From: Jani Nikula To: Nicolas Schier Cc: Masahiro Yamada , Jonathan Corbet , Nathan Chancellor , linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Rong Zhang , Mauro Carvalho Chehab Subject: Re: [PATCH] kbuild: Do not run kernel-doc when building external modules In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo, Finland References: <20260130-kbuild-skip-kernel-doc-extmod-v1-1-58443d60131a@kernel.org> <176987242178.1743608.5094531752561489739.b4-ty@kernel.org> <6387ba7b99fb952a59932c3a851dfd0ecc4dfb2c@intel.com> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2026 12:39:22 +0200 Message-ID: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Wed, 04 Feb 2026, Nicolas Schier wrote: > Well, sounds straight forward at first, but where should we make the > cut between kbuild and non-kbuild? I'll reply hypothetically, just for the sake of discussion, because realistically, I don't think any of this is going to happen. IMO the cut should be, "Is this required for configuring and building the kernel"? scripts/ just sounds like a dumping ground for random scripts, and kbuild should be somewhere else. And let scripts/ be the dumping ground that it is. If kbuild was under kbuild/, nobody in their right mind would suggest adding random unrelated scripts there. If kbuild depends on some things like objtool from somewhere else, so be it, but at least don't pollute kbuild with unrelated things. > I admit that there are some scripts below scripts/ that I'd rather > label as "contrib", but I don't think that these are too much. I've got to disagree there. I think there's so much that it's hard to follow what is and isn't actually required for build. At a *very* quick glance, there are things like checkpatch.pl, get_maintainer.pl, anything coccinelle, bash-completion, Lindent, macro_checker.py, bloat-o-meter, bootgraph.pl, etc, etc. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel