Am 07.02.19 um 17:18 schrieb Mike Rapoport:
Does checkpatch checks the kernel-doc parts at all?
No. I guess there are to many places to fail / to hard to put someone in
charge. E.g. if you do include a single kernel-doc comment from a source all
kernel-docs in the source will be parsed and may produce (error/warning)
essages. What we have, are some targets:
-linkcheckdocs
check for broken external links (will connect to external hosts)
- refcheckdocs
check for references to non-existing files under Documentation
Right, but these should be checked explicitly and I doubt many people do it
before submitting patches. OTOH, checkpatch is something that's widely used
and if it had verified the kernel-doc parts, more comments would be
following the convention.
I'am with you, but I do not have any clue how to solve this Gordian Knot
faithful and without massive collateral damage / sorry :|
The only thing I know, we have the -none option:
$ ./scripts/kernel-doc -none ./include/media/cec.h
./include/media/cec.h:51: warning: Function parameter or member 'lock' not
described in 'cec_devnode'
But this is nothing more than noise if the patch does not touch cec_devnode.
And there is another problem I see, if we want to check refs ...
>> -linkcheckdocs
>> check for broken external links (will connect to external hosts)
>>
>> - refcheckdocs
>> check for references to non-existing files under Documentation
The refs are solved late in the sphinx build process when .rst files and
kernel-doc comments come together .. so we need sphinx for checkpatch,
I gues this is a no-go (?)
-- Markus --
