[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87poovsuhk.fsf@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 13:19:19 +0300
From: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com>
To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>,
Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] RFC: The beginning of a proper driver-api book
On Fri, 26 Aug 2016, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com> wrote:
> Em Fri, 26 Aug 2016 11:34:38 +0200
> Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@...marit.de> escreveu:
>
>> Am 23.08.2016 um 16:43 schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>:
>>
>> > Em Mon, 22 Aug 2016 14:57:40 -0600
>> > Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> escreveu:
>> >
>> >> This short series convers device-drivers.tmpl into the RST format, splits
>> >> it up, and sets up the result under Documentation/driver-api/. For added
>> >> fun, I've taken one top-level file (hsi.txt) and folded it into the
>> >> document as a way of showing the direction I'm thinking I would like things
>> >> to go. There is plenty more of this sort of work that could be done, to
>> >> say the least - this is just a beginning!
>> >>
>> >> The formatted results can be seen at:
>> >>
>> >> http://static.lwn.net/kerneldoc/driver-api/index.html
>> >
>> > Thanks for doing that! IMHO, the conversion of this book is indeed
>> > one of the first things to be done.
>>
>> >> As part of the long-term task to turn Documentation/ into less of a horror
>> >> movie, I'd like to collect documentation of the driver-specific API here.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> here are my 2cent, about the *generic* content from the kernel-doc
>> directive:
>>
>> .. kernel-doc:: kernel/sched/core.c
>> :export:
>>
>> IMHO directives like the one above are to *generic*. If I read this directive
>> I would expect, that all exported symbols are documented. But this is a false
>> estimation!
>>
>> In my POC I use a more restrictive kernel-doc parser
>> (https://github.com/return42/linuxdoc). For the directive above the parser
>> logs, that some of the exported symbols are not found / not documented:
>>
>> $ kernel-doc --quiet --list-exports kernel/sched/core.c
>> [exported undocumented ] set_cpus_allowed_ptr
>> [exported undocumented ] kick_process
>> [exported function ] wake_up_process
>> [exported undocumented ] preempt_notifier_inc
>> [exported undocumented ] preempt_notifier_dec
>> [exported function ] preempt_notifier_register
>> [exported function ] preempt_notifier_unregister
>> [exported undocumented ] single_task_running
>> [exported undocumented ] preempt_count_add
>> [exported undocumented ] preempt_count_sub
>> [exported undocumented ] schedule
>> [exported undocumented ] preempt_schedule
>> [exported function ] preempt_schedule_notrace
>> [exported undocumented ] default_wake_function
>> [exported undocumented ] set_user_nice
>> [exported function ] sched_setscheduler
>> [exported undocumented ] sched_setattr
>> [exported function ] sched_setscheduler_nocheck
>> [exported undocumented ] _cond_resched
>> [exported undocumented ] __cond_resched_lock
>> [exported undocumented ] __cond_resched_softirq
>> [exported function ] yield
>> [exported function ] yield_to
>> [exported undocumented ] io_schedule_timeout
>> [exported undocumented ] __might_sleep
>> [exported undocumented ] ___might_sleep
>>
>>
>> The driver-api is full of *generic* content and IMHO it is not really clear
>> what would be a part of the resulting documentation. To illustrate, you
>> can take a look on the (old) *automatic* conversion of mine at:
>>
>> http://return42.github.io/sphkerneldoc/books/device-drivers/index.html
>>
>> There you see a list of 'Oops: Document generation inconsistency.'
>> This kind of missing documentation grows up with changes to
>> the source files while there are no errors reported.
>>
>> What I mean: in most use cases it is better to be explicit and name the
>> functions, structs or whatever which should be a part of the documentation.
>> e.g.::
>>
>> .. kernel-doc:: kernel/sched/core.c
>> :functions: wake_up_process yield ...
>>
>> By being explicit, the kernel-doc parser has a chance to identify requested
>> but missing documentation and log related error messages.
>>
>> Summarized:
>>
>> - *explicit* is better than implicit.
>> - the *generic* part of kernel-doc parser should more restrictive
>>
>> These are my thoughts, even if we do nothing to handle it, we
>> should aware about this.
>
> I actually prefer the opposite:
Ditto.
Jani.
>
> - on a *.c file, it should assume that *all* exported symbols should be
> documented (either at the C code itself or at a header file);
>
> - on a *.h file, it should assume that *all* structs, enums, typedefs,
> function prototypes and static inline functions should be documented.
> As I stated before, we should also add a way to document defines.
> Assuming that we add such way, for defines, it should implicitly
> ignore the ones used inside the header to enable/disable part of
> its contents, like:
> #define _FOO_H_
> #ifndef _FOO_H_
> ....
> #endif
>
> Then, add an option to allow explicitly ignoring symbols. The lack
> of documentation for a symbol that matches the above criteria and
> isn't explicitly ignored should be warned, as this is a documentation
> gap that should be fixed.
>
> Thanks,
> Mauro
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
Powered by blists - more mailing lists