Em Thu, 1 Oct 2020 15:48:54 -0600 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> escreveu: > On Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:24:23 +0200 > Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This series add proper support for Sphinx 3.1 and above for building the html docs. > > > > This series comes after the one I wrote fixing the warnings. > > > > With this series applied on the top of next-20200922, there are just 12 > > warnings: > > - 2 of them happens also on Sphinx 2.4.4 > > (both seem easy to fix: I'll send later fixes for those); > > - 10 happens only on Sphinx 3.2.1. > > > > The new warnings are all due to duplicated C domain cross-reference symbols. > > > > Basically, the C domain on Sphinx doesn't allow to have an struct and > > a function with the same name. I opened an issue on Sphinx.: > > > > https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/8241 > > > > Hopefully, some newer version may have it fixed. > > > > There is still one thing that requires a fix: the automarkup.py. The > > way cross-references are stored with Sphinx 3 are different. > > I didn't try yet to address it, but I suspect that it shouldn't be > > hard to address it. > > Modulo my comment on part 4, I think this is what we want. It's kind of > unfortunate that it's all necessary, but that's the way things are these > days, I guess. Yes, it is unfortunate. Yet, my feeling is that this approach provides us a good way to transition to the new C domain parser, which has some advantages over the older code. > This part is a bit intimidating, though: > > > 288 files changed, 1709 insertions(+), 2183 deletions(-) Yes. Yet, the media userspace API is responsible for most of it: 224 files changed, 1076 insertions(+), 1716 deletions(-) As most of the uAPI documentation doesn't rely on kernel-doc (mostly due to historic reasons). To be fair, most of the other changes outside the building system are due to already-existing issues at the documentation. There are several kernel-doc tags creating duplicated C references. While Sphinx < 3 C domain parser were able to detect them, such warnings are disabled by default. > Should we maybe position this as an end-of-merge-window blast, once other > stuff has hopefully mostly settled? I can certainly warn Linus that it's > coming when I send the main docs pull. Yeah, adding this series, together with the remaining patches fixing all warnings with Sphinx < 3 at the end of the merge window seems the right thing to do, IMO. > I wonder how soon we could pull our minimum version forward to 3.1 and > drop a bunch of stuff? I fear it may not be for a while, alas... I guess it may take some time. In any case, for the next minimal version, I would set for the upcoming one that will fix those issue reported here: https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/7819 https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/8241 One such example is this warning: .../Documentation/driver-api/miscellaneous:48: ../drivers/pwm/core.c:669: WARNING: Duplicate C declaration, also defined in 'driver-api/miscellaneous'. Declaration is 'int pwm_capture (struct pwm_device *pwm, struct pwm_capture *result, unsigned long timeout)'. (See: we have a function pwm_capture and a struct with the same name. Both have kernel-doc tags at drivers/pwm/core.c) Without fixing it, there's no way to produce a zero-warning docs building[1] with Sphinx versions above 2.4.x. [1] Well, it could be possible to rename such kAPI symbols to make Sphinx happy, but IMO, the C domain there should be able to fully support the C language. > Thanks for doing all this work, Anytime. Thanks, Mauro
