On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:58 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 12:24 PM Grant Seltzer Richman > <grantseltzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 12:26 AM Andrii Nakryiko > > <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2021 at 12:38 PM Grant Seltzer Richman > > > <grantseltzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:14 PM Grant Seltzer Richman > > > > <grantseltzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 8:47 PM Andrii Nakryiko > > > > > <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 9:51 AM Grant Seltzer Richman > > > > > > <grantseltzer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have been experimenting with ways to contribute documentation to > > > > > > > libbpf to make it easier for developers of bpf projects to use it. > > > > > > > With the goal of making a documentation site that is easy to > > > > > > > maintain/generate I found Doxygen (many of you may have experience > > > > > > > with it, I did not). I set up a CI/CD workflow using github actions > > > > > > > that runs doxygen on the libbpf mirror hosted there, and hosts the > > > > > > > produced HTML using netlify. You can find the currently hosted version > > > > > > > of it at https://libbpf-docs.netlify.app (I would gladly donate a real > > > > > > > domain name for this purpose). The docs generation workflow is in my > > > > > > > github repo here: https://github.com/grantseltzer/libbpf-docs > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for investigating this! I've look at libbpf-docs.netlify.app, > > > > > > and it seems like it just contains a list of structs and their fields > > > > > > (both those that are part of libbpf API, as well as internal). Out of > > > > > > all functions only two are listed there (libbpf_nla_parse_nested and > > > > > > libbpf_nla_parse) and both are not part of libbpf API as well. So I > > > > > > understand that I don't see any comments due to the '/**' format > > > > > > (though it would be easy to run sed script adding it everywhere, just > > > > > > as part of an experiment), but I'm not sure why none of API functions > > > > > > are present there? > > > > > > > > > > > > I think kernel docs used to be hosted on readthedocs.org, seems like > > > > > > they are also providing hosting for open-source projects, so that > > > > > > would solve the problem of the hosting. Have you looked at that > > > > > > solution? It definitely has a bit more modern UI that > > > > > > Doxygen-generated one :) but I don't know what are the real > > > > > > differences between Sphinx and Doxygen and which one we should choose. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to make this work all we would need is to format comments > > > > > > > above functions we want to document. Doxygen requires that the comment > > > > > > > just be in a block that starts with `/**`. I don't think doxygen > > > > > > > specific directives should be committed to code but I think this is a > > > > > > > fine convention to follow. Other doxygen directives (i.e. having > > > > > > > `@file` in every file) can be faked using a step I have in the github > > > > > > > actions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What does everyone think? Can we agree on this convention and start > > > > > > > contributing documentation in this way? Any pitfalls to doxygen I'm > > > > > > > not familiar with? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > As far as I understand Doxygen's only criteria for generating > > > > > documentation for functions is if the correctly formatted comment is > > > > > present. I've changed the repo that the libbpf-docs.netlify.app > > > > > website uses to track a fork libbpf I have on my personal account. I > > > > > added comments above some ringbuffer functions to demonstrate this. > > > > > > > > > > Interestingly the two functions that already show up > > > > > (libbpf_nla_parse/parse_nested) have comments which are specifically > > > > > formatted for doxygen, even including directives for arguments and > > > > > related functions. > > > > > > > > > > I have heard of Sphinx/read-the-docs but didn't look too deeply into > > > > > it, I'll check it out and report back with my findings! > > > > > > > > I've finally gotten a chance to circle around to this. I investigated > > > > Sphinx and read the docs. As far as I can tell Doxygen is still > > > > required for generating that docs from code. Sphinx seems to typically > > > > be used to transform markdown documentation files into themed html > > > > pages. Sphinx would also enable us to host the documentation on > > > > readthedocs's, but it would still be the output of Doxygen, meaning it > > > > wouldn't have the nice theme that you see on other readthedocs pages. > > > > > > > > I have a barebones example set up of what that would look like at > > > > libbpf.readthedocs.io which pulls from my fork of the github mirror > > > > here: github.com/grantseltzer/libbpf > > > > > > > > The advantage of this approach is only having free hosting and having > > > > a 'readthedocs.io' domain. It would still require CI for pulling in > > > > libbpf releases, appending doxygen directives, and of course > > > > committing comments in code next to api functions/types. > > > > > > > > > > I didn't have much time to investigate Sphinx vs Doxygen. Reding [0] > > > diagonally, seems like you need few extensions (breathe and > > > sphinx_rtd_theme) to make everything work. It also seems like > > > readthedocs will be able to automatically pull and generate > > > documentation, so if all that is true, it still seems like Sphinx + > > > readthedocs is the better and more modern approach. > > > > > > [0] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/cppblog/clear-functional-c-documentation-with-sphinx-breathe-doxygen-cmake/ > > > > That link proved helpful. I was not using the breathe plugin > > directives correctly in the previous iteration. Thanks! > > > > Great, glad it helped. > > > > > > > > I prefer the previous approach (github actions + netlify/github pages) > > > > but regardless would happily set this up if we can start an initiative > > > > to add those code comments in code, which I'd also like to help > > > > contribute to. I'd also be happy to hear of suggestions of free/open > > > > source alternatives for CI. > > > > > > We currently use Travis CI for libbpf CI, but I'm not very happy with > > > it and ideally we should move to GitHub Actions or something along > > > those lines. > > > > I recently set up some github actions workflow for the project I help > > maintain and really like it so far, I would be happy to help > > transition. > > Yeah, we currently have entire infrastructure around Travis CI in > which we compile the latest kernel, selftests, spin up qemu instance > and run selftests inside it. It would be great to migrate that to > Github Actions, I hope that most of the logic doesn't need to change. > But unfortunately I haven't been able to dedicate enough time to > tackle that migration. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Andrii, do you run the libbpf github org and mirror repo? > > > > > > Yes, I have admin access along Alexei and Daniel. So we'll be able to > > > set up whatever needs to be set up. > > > > I just pushed changes for libbpf.readthedocs.io for you to check out. > > It looks great! Something that's from the modern era, you know... ;) > > > The 'API' page has the auto generated docs based on public > > functions/structs/enums in libbpf.h. There's a couple of functions > > that I added bogus test comments to show what documentation would > > look like. (`libbpf_num_possible_cpus` has a good example). Also the > > 'BPF Program Types' page is just to serve as an example of how we can > > include documentation that isn't just auto generated from code. > > > > I need to read the `sync-kernel.sh` script to better understand how > > the mirror works, but after that would it be helpful to open a github > > PR? Once that'd get merged I'd transfer the readthedocs libbpf page to > > track it. I also want to discuss this on the linux-doc mailing list > > for input. > > sync-kernel.sh has few places where rules for transforming kernel > source code into Github layout are specified. Only those would need to > be updated, probably. > > So yeah, please take a look and submit PR and/or patches here. Let's > start with just bare bones infra for documentation and then start > improving doc comments themselves. Went ahead and submitted a PR on the mirror: https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/pull/260 I'll follow that up with some initial patches to the code with comment documentation, and likely also some blog content promoting this initiative.
