Re: [PATCH] scripts/kernel-doc Allow struct arguments documentation in struct body

Daniel Vetter
2015-08-03T15:34:03Z

On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 08:37:41AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2015 10:23:19 +0200
> Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>
> > > I'm wondering if we need a kernel summit session on commenting
> > > conventions, markdown-in-kerneldoc, etc? Maybe I'll stick a proposal out
> > > there.
> >
> > Might be useful, but I'm not sure how many people really would actively
> > work on improving the tooling. The only comment I've seen is to maybe use
> > gtkdoc, but that would be a pain since it's slightly incompatible with
> > kerneldoc.
>
> The idea was to get a sense for what sort of improvements would be
> useful, to begin with. But my attempt to start a discussion on the
> kernel summit list appears to have hit the ground pretty hard; I guess
> that means I have free rein :)

Wrt feature wishlists the 3 things Danilo has worked on thus far
(hyperlinks, markdown and inline struct member kerneldoc) are really the
things I'd like to have. Of course there's room for some more
prettification, but I think that would better fit as improvements to
pandoc. One example is more flexible table handling with row/column
spanning - currently pandoc doesn't handle that in the docbook converter.

> I expect I'll apply the struct-args doc patch in the fairly near future.
> Then we'll see if others complain when patches using it start to show up,
> but the feature itself shouldn't break anything. I'm *really* hoping to
> take a hard look at Danilo's stuff for a 4.3 merge as well. It should be
> possible, but there's real-world obnoxiousness that is doing its best to
> get in the way.

Awesome. Missing 4.3 wouldn't be a big deal for i915 really since drm
feature freeze should happen around -rc5 anyway, so everything new I pull
in will be for 4.4 only. But getting it in early always helps, just in
case there's something unexpected.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation