On Tue, 31 May 2016, Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Am 31.05.2016 um 10:07 schrieb Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>: >> 0-day builds all docs, and checks for new warnings. Even in today's >> gpu.tmpl build there's a massive pile of warnings, so yes developers >> don't look. But 0-day does, and then developers look at the nice mails >> from 0-day. It mostly works to keep out new fail I think. > > In general, I'am not very happy with workarounds like this. IMO these > are workarounds are often, rewards bunglers and punish those with more work, > who want make thinks right. There might be situations where 0-day build > is the only/best solution. But *here* we are talking about one additional > comment line the author adds, when he modify his source comments from kernel-doc > to reST markup .. IMO not very hard. That "one line" translates to nearly 50000 kernel-doc comments in more than 6000 files. If you expect people to add a tag in each file/comment, it will never happen. If we assume it's all rst, we can at least start converting. I quickly wrote a small "kernel-doc-rst-lint" script (70 lines of python) based on rst-lint [1] that runs kernel-doc on a file and reports all the kernel-doc and rst-lint errors in the output. This can be run as a "checker" in the kernel build with $ make CHECKER=scripts/kernel-doc-rst-lint C=1 and it can provide better and more direct warnings on kernel-doc/rst errors than a full Sphinx build does. BR, Jani. [1] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/restructuredtext_lint -- Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
