On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 10:46:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 01:25:18PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 10:01:42PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 12:53:46PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > Do you have an alternative suggestion for generating the kernel-doc? > > > > The current lack of it is problematic. > > > > > > I've never found a lack of kernel-doc to be a problem. And I'm very much > > > against complicating the scripts to add it. > > > > I am sure that you have not recently found the lack of kernel-doc for > > the atomic operations to be a problem, given that you wrote many of > > these functions. > > Sure; but I meant in general -- I've *never* used kernel-doc. Comments I > occasionally read, and sometimes they're not even broken either, but > kernel-doc, nope. > > > OK, you mentioned concerns about documentation people nitpicking. This > > can be dealt with. The added scripting is not that large or complex. > > > > > Also, there's Documentation/atomic_t.txt > > > > Yes, if you very carefully read that document end to end, correctly > > interpreting it all, you will know what you need to. Of course, first > > you have to find it. And then you must avoid any lapses while reading > > it while under pressure. Not particularly friendly to someone trying > > to chase a bug. > > It's either brief and terse or tediously long -- I vastly prefer the > former, my brain can much better parse structure than English prose. > > Also, I find, pressure is never conductive to anything, except prehaps > cooking rice and steam trains (because nothing is as delicous as a > pressure cooked train -- oh wait). > > Add enough pressure and the human brain reduces to driven and can't read Just in case it weren't clear: s/driven/drivel/ > even the most coherent of text no matter how easy to find. > > In such situations it's for the manager to take the pressure away and > the engineer to think in relative peace.
