Re: [RFC PATCH 00/29] kernel-doc: update from Linux 5.10

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 30/11/20 12:28, Peter Maydell wrote:
> If we wanted to completely make the series bisection safe we could add
> a patch at the start that simply comments out the five kernel-doc
> directives in docs/devel/*.rst, and then have a final patch at the
> end that reverts it. That seems like it would be simple enough and
> it would avoid anybody doing a bisection run on a newer host having
> to remember to put --disable-docs in their configure arguments.
> 
>>    scripts: kernel-doc: allow passing desired Sphinx C domain dialect
> 
> Your port of this kernel commit is missing the hunk which
> must be applied to our docs/sphinx/kerneldoc.py:
> 
> More generally it would probably be reasonable to sync also
> kerneldoc.py -- we're only slightly adrift of the kernel version
> and we don't need any of the changes the kernel has, but syncing
> it at the same time we sync kernel-doc is probably less confusing.
> 
> I did a diff of the final kernel-doc against the kernel version.
> Mostly the diff looks like changes we want (and it's pretty small,
> which is great). This hunk, however:
> 
> @@ -1758,7 +1758,7 @@
>       # If you mess with these regexps, it's a good idea to check that
>       # the following functions' documentation still comes out right:
>       # - parport_register_device (function pointer parameters)
> -    # - atomic_set (macro)
> +    # - qatomic_set (macro)
>       # - pci_match_device, __copy_to_user (long return type)
> 
> is an unintentional change from QEMU commit d73415a31547, which
> did a global search-and-replace of a function name.
> We should probably add a patch to this series to
> revert it, so we stay as close to the kernel's copy of the
> script as possible.

Ok, I'll clean these up and resend.

Paolo