linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Docs-build warning fixes for 5.10-rc3

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: <20201103212432.GI27442@casper.infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:24:32 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Docs-build warning fixes for 5.10-rc3

On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 01:18:27PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 11:44 AM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net> wrote:
> >
> > This pull contains a series of warning fixes from Mauro; once applied, the
> > number of warnings from the once-noisy docs build process is nearly zero.
> > Getting to this point has required a lot of work; once there, hopefully we
> > can keep things that way.
> 
> I wonder if it is quiet enough that we could make new doc build noise
> trigger some kind of linux-next warning?

We can move checkdoc out of W=1 ... something like this?

+++ b/scripts/Makefile.build
@@ -103,9 +103,7 @@ else ifeq ($(KBUILD_CHECKSRC),2)
         cmd_force_checksrc = $(CHECK) $(CHECKFLAGS) $(c_flags) $<
 endif
 
-ifneq ($(KBUILD_EXTRA_WARN),)
-  cmd_checkdoc = $(srctree)/scripts/kernel-doc -none $<
-endif
+cmd_checkdoc = $(srctree)/scripts/kernel-doc -none $<
 
 # Compile C sources (.c)
 # ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

although people might whinge if it increases kernel build time noticably
(I haven't checked if it does).

It won't catch all the things that actually running Sphinx will, but
it catches the common things (forgot to update the docs after changing a
function parameter, for example)