Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Oops, I'm pretty sure that I tried, but likely didn't rerun on fresh
> tree, so seen just changes resulted from adding visibility.h
>
> Sorry about that.
>
> But looking now at those new errors/warnings and IMO it seems that all
> of them are valid, mostly due to mistakes with formatting of the
> comments, not that tool is now broken.
>
>
> Few examples:
>
> ../kernel/resource.c:148: warning: This comment starts with '/**', but
> isn't a kernel-doc comment. Refer Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst
> * If the resource was allocated using memblock early during
>
> 145 static void free_resource(struct resource *res)
> 146 {
> 147 /**
> 148 * If the resource was allocated using memblock early
>
> this should be formatted as normal multi-line comment inside the
> function, not in a kernel-doc fashion
I won't disagree with that. But we really can't add that many more
warnings to a docs build. Even though getting rid of all the warnings
seems like a hopeless task, it is still a goal; adding another pile will
cause any other new warnings to be completely buried.
How hard would it to talk you into submitting patches to all of the
relevant maintainers fixing the erroneous comments? :)
Thanks,
jon
