[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170516084137.454925e4@vento.lan>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 08:41:37 -0300
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/36] mutex, futex: adjust kernel-doc markups to
generate ReST
Em Tue, 16 May 2017 13:16:56 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> escreveu:
> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 02:22:39PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Yet, on the other hand, nobody wants lots of warnings/errors
> > produced when building the Kernel or the documentation, as it can ride
> > important things that would require fixes.
>
> So would that actually generate a warn/error? Or just generate weird
> output?
Both warn/error and weird output. From my side, the only reason
for writing this patch is to fix the warnings that would otherwise
be produced without it:
./kernel/futex.c:492: WARNING: Inline emphasis start-string without end-string.
./kernel/futex.c:1264: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
./kernel/futex.c:1721: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
./kernel/futex.c:2338: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
./kernel/futex.c:2426: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
./kernel/futex.c:2899: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
./kernel/futex.c:2972: WARNING: Block quote ends without a blank line; unexpected unindent.
>
> Because I'm perfectly fine with weird output.
>
> Our primary interface to the code is a text editor, and things should be
> readable in that form. Anything that detracts from that is a fail.
>
> If people like to use web browsers (I don't) then I won't stop them, but
> they have to realize they're the odd ducks out for viewing things
> outside its native form.
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > index 198527a62149..858a07590e39 100644
> > --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c
> > @@ -227,9 +227,9 @@ static void __sched __mutex_lock_slowpath(struct mutex *lock);
> > * (or statically defined) before it can be locked. memset()-ing
> > * the mutex to 0 is not allowed.
> > *
> > - * ( The CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES .config option turns on debugging
> > - * checks that will enforce the restrictions and will also do
> > - * deadlock debugging. )
> > + * (The CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES .config option turns on debugging
> > + * checks that will enforce the restrictions and will also do
> > + * deadlock debugging)
> > *
> > * This function is similar to (but not equivalent to) down().
> > */
> >
> >
> >
Thanks,
Mauro
Powered by blists - more mailing lists