On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 10:49:37AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > kernel-doc checks were initially enabled only for builds which had extra > > warnings enabled. We have now eliminated enough kernel-doc warnings that > > we can enable kernel-doc checking by default. This comes at a slight > > cost; for an allmodconfig build, make -j8 fs/ timings on my laptop > > increase by less than 5%: > > So I'm not opposed to this and can carry it in docs-next (after the > merge window, though, for something like this). But, it seems to me, we > should copy Masahiro (added) on a build patch of this type. Thanks! I've got a small collection of doc fixup patches redy to go; I'm going to spray them at maintainers and see what lands in this merge window. I'm focusing on mm/ and fs/ since I know those areas better than others. net/ is in good shape; only 25 lines of errors (21 of them in ceph). I would suggest that we still have quite a lot of kernel-doc which is not incorporated into .rst files, which seems like a shame. Does anyone have time to write a script that finds every file with kernel-doc in it, then finds which of those files do not have ".. kernel-doc::" lines in Documentation/ ?
