On Sun, 13 Oct 2019, Changbin Du <changbin.du@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The 'functions' directive is not only for functions, but also works for > structs/unions. So the name is misleading. This patch renames it to > 'specific', so now we have export/internal/specific directives to limit > the functions/types to be included in documentation. Meanwhile we improved > the warning message. Agreed on "functions" being less than perfect. It directly exposes the idiosyncrasies of scripts/kernel-doc. I'm not sure "specific" is any better, though. Perhaps "symbols" would be more self-explanatory. Or, actually make "functions" only work on functions, and add a separate keyword for other stuff. *shrug* Seems like the patch is way too big. I'd probably add "symbols" (or whatever) as a synonym for "functions" for starters, and convert documents piecemeal, and finally drop the old one. The scripts/kernel-doc change should be a patch of its own. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
