scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[SF Markus Elfring]

Hello,

Information from a commit like "docs: sphinxify coccinelle.txt and add it
to dev-tools" caught also my software development attention.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/Documentation/coccinelle.txt?id=4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e

Did an other information from a comment become outdated in the script "coccicheck"
because of such changes for the documentation format?
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4

Regards,
Markus

Re: scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[Julia Lawall]

On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Information from a commit like "docs: sphinxify coccinelle.txt and add it
> to dev-tools" caught also my software development attention.
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/Documentation/coccinelle.txt?id=4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e
>
> Did an other information from a comment become outdated in the script "coccicheck"
> because of such changes for the documentation format?
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4

How about submitting a patch to fix the problem?

julia

Re: scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[SF Markus Elfring]

>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4
> 
> How about submitting a patch to fix the problem?

I would appreciate to become a bit more sure about the current storage location
which should be referenced in this file.

Regards,
Markus

Re: scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[Julia Lawall]

On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4
> >
> > How about submitting a patch to fix the problem?
>
> I would appreciate to become a bit more sure about the current storage location
> which should be referenced in this file.

In the Documentation directory find . -name "*cocci*"

gives

./dev-tools/coccinelle.rst

I think you could have done that yourself.

julia

>
> Regards,
> Markus
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

Re: scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[SF Markus Elfring]

>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4
>>>
>>> How about submitting a patch to fix the problem?
>>
>> I would appreciate to become a bit more sure about the current storage location
>> which should be referenced in this file.
> 
> In the Documentation directory find . -name "*cocci*"
> 
> gives
> 
> ./dev-tools/coccinelle.rst
> 
> I think you could have done that yourself.

Does the usage of the format "reStructuredText" trigger further considerations
like the following?

* Does your feedback suggest that the path from this source file should be put
  in related places?

* Would it make sense to store such a file name in a special variable?

* When would you refer to generated file formats (like PDF) for this use case?

Regards,
Markus

Re: scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[Julia Lawall]

On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4
> >>>
> >>> How about submitting a patch to fix the problem?
> >>
> >> I would appreciate to become a bit more sure about the current storage location
> >> which should be referenced in this file.
> >
> > In the Documentation directory find . -name "*cocci*"
> >
> > gives
> >
> > ./dev-tools/coccinelle.rst
> >
> > I think you could have done that yourself.
>
> Does the usage of the format "reStructuredText" trigger further considerations
> like the following?
>
> * Does your feedback suggest that the path from this source file should be put
>   in related places?
>
> * Would it make sense to store such a file name in a special variable?
>
> * When would you refer to generated file formats (like PDF) for this use case?

Either you send the patch, or I will send the patch, when I have time,
with no credit to you.  I'm not an expert on all of the future plans for
the documentation,  The only think I know is where the file is now, and
that the file is perfectly readable in its rst format, and thus it seems
quite all right to reference it.  If the situation change in the future,
we can have another patch in the future.

julia

Re: scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[SF Markus Elfring]

> Either you send the patch, or I will send the patch, when I have time,
> with no credit to you.

I am curious when "the time" will be appropriate.


> I'm not an expert on all of the future plans for the documentation,

I assumed that you know a bit more about the corresponding software evolution
than me.


> The only think I know is where the file is now, and that the file
> is perfectly readable in its rst format, and thus it seems
> quite all right to reference it.

I can agree to such an information in principle.


> If the situation change in the future, we can have another patch
> in the future.

I would appreciate another clarification:
Do I overlook any commit for the discussed source file anyhow?
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/log/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst

Regards,
Markus

Re: scripts/coccicheck: Update for a comment?

[SF Markus Elfring]

> Do I overlook any commit for the discussed source file anyhow?
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/log/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst

It seems that I missed this file also because an other path will be appropriate.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/log/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst

Regards,
Markus

[PATCH] scripts/coccicheck: Update reference for the corresponding documentation

[SF Markus Elfring]

From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:06:15 +0200

Use the current name (in a comment at the beginning of this script) for
the file which was converted to the documentation format "reStructuredText"
in August 2016.

Fixes: 4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e ("docs: sphinxify coccinelle.txt and add it to dev-tools")
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
---
 scripts/coccicheck | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/scripts/coccicheck b/scripts/coccicheck
index c92c1528..ec487b8 100755
--- a/scripts/coccicheck
+++ b/scripts/coccicheck
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 #!/bin/bash
 # Linux kernel coccicheck
 #
-# Read Documentation/coccinelle.txt
+# Read Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst
 #
 # This script requires at least spatch
 # version 1.0.0-rc11.
-- 
2.10.1

Re: [PATCH] scripts/coccicheck: Update reference for the corresponding documentation

[Julia Lawall]

On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:06:15 +0200
>
> Use the current name (in a comment at the beginning of this script) for
> the file which was converted to the documentation format "reStructuredText"
> in August 2016.
>
> Fixes: 4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e ("docs: sphinxify coccinelle.txt and add it to dev-tools")
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>

Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>

> ---
>  scripts/coccicheck | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/coccicheck b/scripts/coccicheck
> index c92c1528..ec487b8 100755
> --- a/scripts/coccicheck
> +++ b/scripts/coccicheck
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
>  #!/bin/bash
>  # Linux kernel coccicheck
>  #
> -# Read Documentation/coccinelle.txt
> +# Read Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst
>  #
>  # This script requires at least spatch
>  # version 1.0.0-rc11.
> --
> 2.10.1
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

Re: [PATCH] scripts/coccicheck: Update reference for the corresponding documentation

[Michal Marek]

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 08:30:48PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, 7 Oct 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> 
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 16:06:15 +0200
> >
> > Use the current name (in a comment at the beginning of this script) for
> > the file which was converted to the documentation format "reStructuredText"
> > in August 2016.
> >
> > Fixes: 4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e ("docs: sphinxify coccinelle.txt and add it to dev-tools")
> > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> 
> Acked-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>

Applied to kbuild.git#misc, thanks.

Michal

Re: docs: Fixing "sphinxify coccinelle.txt"?

[SF Markus Elfring]

>> Information from a commit like "docs: sphinxify coccinelle.txt and add it
>> to dev-tools" caught also my software development attention.
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/Documentation/coccinelle.txt?id=4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e
>>
>> Did an other information from a comment become outdated in the script "coccicheck"
>> because of such changes for the documentation format?
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4
> 
> How about submitting a patch to fix the problem?

Is the published commit (from 2016-08-08 / 2016-08-18) generally questionable
as I see it by the interface "cgit" at the moment?

* Does this one contain only the deletion of the file "Documentation/coccinelle.txt"?

* How should the result from the mentioned action "add it to dev-tools"
  look like finally?

* How could the acknowledgements happen for a software transformation
  which seems to be incomplete there?


I find another data display also interesting and more promising.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9269973/

* Should this patch about the desired file format conversion become available
  also by the other known interfaces?

* Would it have been nicer to include a corresponding update for the file
  "scripts/coccicheck" there, too?

* Do we need to clarify the distribution of the correct version any further?


Regards,
Markus

Re: docs: Fixing "sphinxify coccinelle.txt"?

[SF Markus Elfring]

>>> Information from a commit like "docs: sphinxify coccinelle.txt and add it
>>> to dev-tools" caught also my software development attention.
>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/Documentation/coccinelle.txt?id=4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e
>>>
>>> Did an other information from a comment become outdated in the script "coccicheck"
>>> because of such changes for the documentation format?
>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/scripts/coccicheck?id=c802e87fbe2d4dd58982d01b3c39bc5a781223aa#n4
>>
>> How about submitting a patch to fix the problem?
> 
> Is the published commit (from 2016-08-08 / 2016-08-18) generally questionable
> as I see it by the interface "cgit" at the moment?
> 
> * Does this one contain only the deletion of the file "Documentation/coccinelle.txt"?

It seems that I got an inappropriate impression from this kind of
data display alone.


The display for the changed file name contains only the desired addition.
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/Documentation/dev-tools/coccinelle.rst?id=4b9033a33494ec9154d63e706e9e47f7eb3fd59e


> I find another data display also interesting and more promising.
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9269973/
> 
> * Should this patch about the desired file format conversion become available
>   also by the other known interfaces?

The interface "cgit v0.12" does not indicate the involved "renaming" (similarity index 56%)
so far which can be better seen in the downloadable patch file.

Regards,
Markus