linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/10] Documentation/sphinx: add Sphinx kernel-doc directive extension

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <8E922B7E-7805-4381-85F6-D61CB70C9840@darmarit.de>
Date:	Sat, 4 Jun 2016 08:57:31 +0200
From:	Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>
To:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc:	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
	Dan Allen <dan@...ndevise.io>,
	Russel Winder <russel@...der.org.uk>,
	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] Documentation/sphinx: add Sphinx kernel-doc directive extension


Am 03.06.2016 um 22:35 schrieb Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>:

> On Fri, 20 May 2016 16:39:36 +0300
> Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com> wrote:
> 
>> Add an extension to handle kernel-doc directives, to call kernel-doc
>> according to the arguments and parameters given to the reStructuredText
>> directive.
>> 
>> The syntax for the kernel-doc directive is:
>> 
>> .. kernel-doc:: FILENAME
>>   :export:
>>   :internal:
>>   :functions: FUNCTION [FUNCTION ...]
>>   :doc: SECTION TITLE
> 
> So this seems just like what the doctor ordered - nice!
> 
> One little thought that has crossed my mind: it might be nice to be able to
> put a regex in :functions: so we could say something like:
> 
>    :functions: atomic_.*
> 
> That requires a kernel-doc tweak too, of course.  Someday.

IMO it is better to be explicit ... wildcards (ranges) has the disadvantage that
you can't check if any/all definition is missed ...

--Markus-- 

> 
> Might it be worth running this by the Sphinx list just to see what they
> have to say?
> 
> jon