linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kernel-doc: Make the description of return value readable

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20210125105353.5c695d42@coco.lan>
Date:   Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:53:53 +0100
From:   Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
To:     Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
Cc:     corbet@....net,
        "Nícolas F. R. A. Prado" <nfraprado@...tonmail.com>,
        Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel-doc: Make the description of return value
 readable

Em Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:19:04 +0200
Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org> escreveu:

> The description on how to describe return values is over-complicated, and
> hard to follow. For alien reason, the body of the section is a note, and
> the first paragraph speaks about 'Return', albeit the section name is
> actually 'Return:'.
> 
> To give a better help when both implementing and reviewing patches, provide
> a straight-forward guideline, how to decribe return values, instead of
> providing a note that starts by "blacklisting" one of the infinite possible
> options of doing it wrong.
> 
> This decreases the cumulative amount of time, which is probably
> substantial, on this otherwise somewhat trivial topic.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst | 34 +++++++-------------------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst b/Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst
> index 79aaa55d6bcf..dc5e1722c150 100644
> --- a/Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst
> @@ -136,34 +136,18 @@ Examples::
>  Return values
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  
> -The return value, if any, should be described in a dedicated section
> -named ``Return``.
> +The return value, if any, should be described in a dedicated section named
> +``Return:``.
>  
> -.. note::
> -
> -  #) The multi-line descriptive text you provide does *not* recognize
> -     line breaks, so if you try to format some text nicely, as in::
> -
> -	* Return:
> -	* 0 - OK
> -	* -EINVAL - invalid argument
> -	* -ENOMEM - out of memory
> -
> -     this will all run together and produce::
> -
> -	Return: 0 - OK -EINVAL - invalid argument -ENOMEM - out of memory
> -
> -     So, in order to produce the desired line breaks, you need to use a
> -     ReST list, e. g.::
> +In order to describe multiple return values, a ReST list should be used. That
> +way Sphinx knows how to line-up them properly::
>  
> -      * Return:
> -      * * 0		- OK to runtime suspend the device
> -      * * -EBUSY	- Device should not be runtime suspended
> +  * Return:
> +  * - 0:	The run-time is allowed to suspend the device.
> +  * - -EBUSY:	Device should not be suspended.
>  
> -  #) If the descriptive text you provide has lines that begin with
> -     some phrase followed by a colon, each of those phrases will be taken
> -     as a new section heading, which probably won't produce the desired
> -     effect.
> +Using a dash rather than asterisk an is probably a better idea, because it does
> +not meddle as much with the C-comments.

Well, there are different opinions with that regards... Some devs think that
using:

	- -EBUSY

is confusing. I ended agreeing with that. That's why the recommendation is
to use an asterisk.

Thanks,
Mauro