On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 03:18:53PM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 02:38:12PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > Unfortunately gtkdoc refuses to acknowledge static inlines, so need > > to nuke them. It probably gets confused by that static ... > > > > Also unamed unions confuse gtk-doc, move everything else public up. > > Why do we bother with gtk-doc then? Have you not made kerneldoc available > to igt yet? It occured to me too ;-) I think what we'd need to undertake that step: - More polish on the kernel side. There's talk about rewriting the C parser into something slightly less horrible than a state machine implemented in perl regexes ... - Probably more operational experience with the new kernel doc toolchain. Right now we're all happy with how it works and haven't discovered the new real warts yet. But there are, e.g. media folks have found some fun with how sphinx handles (or doesn't handle) functions with the same name&signature. - Someone with too much time. But yes, I think the kernel doc toolchain is now the one that sucks less compared to igt, pre 4.8 it was definitely igt/gtk-doc that sucked less imo. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation http://blog.ffwll.ch _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
