[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8048e2c6-8c2d-f41e-972b-9f4730aa6726@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 18:09:21 -0500
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/kernel-doc: optionally treat warnings as errors
Thank Jon for the feedback,
>> The kbuild bot recently added the W=1 option, which triggered
>> documentation cleanups to squelch hundreds of kernel-doc warnings.
>>
>> To make sure new kernel contributions don't add regressions to
>> kernel-doc descriptors, this patch suggests an option to treat
>> warnings as errors in CI/automated tests. A command-line option is
>> provided to the kernel-doc script, as well as a check on environment
>> variables to turn this optional behavior on.
>>
>> Examples for the two subsystems I contribute to:
>>
>> KCFLAGS="-Wall -Werror" make W=1 sound/
>> KCFLAGS="-Wall -Werror" make W=1 drivers/soundwire/
>>
>> Randy Dunlap also suggested adding a log for when generating
>> documentation. The documentation build is however not stopped for now.
>>
>> KDOC_WERROR=1 make htmldocs
>
> So I'm not opposed to this, but I'm missing a couple of things in the
> changelog:
>
> - A statement that you are adding a -Werror option that invokes this
> behavior.
>
> - Mention of the fact that you also cause it to look at a couple of
> environment variables and change its behavior based on that.
>
> Could I get a version with that clarified a bit?
Both points were covered by the sentence "A command-line option is
provided to the kernel-doc script, as well as a check on environment
variables to turn this optional behavior on".
I can try and make this clearer, maybe by moving this sentence to the
start of a new paragraph?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists