On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 03:37:10 -0700, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 16:34:42 +0100 > Stephen Kitt <steve@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This script allows sysctl documentation to be checked against the > > kernel source code, to identify missing or obsolete entries. Running > > it against 5.5 shows for example that sysctl/kernel.rst has two > > obsolete entries and is missing 52 entries. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Kitt <steve@xxxxxxx> > > --- > > Changes since v2: > > * drop UTF-8 characters > > * fix license identifier > > * fix example invocation to include path as well as table > > > > v2 was the initial submission (in v2 of the sysctl/kernel.rst patch > > set). > > This seems like a useful thing to have, so I've applied it. It would be > rather more useful, though, with a bit of ... wait for it ... > documentation. Even just an example command line in the header comments > would be a good place to start. Care to send a followup? :) The committed script has this: +# Example invocation: +# scripts/check-sysctl-docs -vtable="kernel" \ +# Documentation/admin-guide/sysctl/kernel.rst \ +# $(git grep -l register_sysctl_) +# +# Specify -vdebug=1 to see debugging information but I agree that it needs more documentation ;-). In particular, I need to explain what the script expects in terms of document layout... Where would be the best place? In admin-guide/sysctl/index.rst, as a “how to maintain these files” section, or in a separate document, or in the script headers? Regards, Stephen
Attachment:
pgpt80ktHWZOW.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
