linux-kernel - [PATCH] docs: rust: explain that `///` vs. `//` applies to private items too

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250416112454.2503872-1-ojeda@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 13:24:54 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>
To: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
	Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
	Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	patches@...ts.linux.dev,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH] docs: rust: explain that `///` vs. `//` applies to private items too

Sometimes kernel developers use `//` for documenting private items,
since those do not get rendered at the moment.

That is reasonable, but the intention behind `///` (and `//!`) vs. `//`
is to convey the distinction between documentation and other kinds of
comments, such as implementation details or TODOs.

It also increases consistency with the public items and thus e.g. allows
to change visibility of an item with less changed involved.

It is not just useful for human readers, but also tooling. For instance,
we may want to eventually generate documentation for private items
(perhaps as a toggle in the HTML UI). On top of that, `rustdoc` lints
as usual for those, too, so we may want to do it even if we do not use
the result.

Thus document this explicitly.

Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/rust-for-linux/CANiq72n_C7exSOMe5yf-7jKKnhSCv+a9QcD=OE2B_Q2UFBL3Xg@mail.gmail.com/
Link: https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/linux/issues/1157
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>
---
 Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst | 12 ++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst b/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst
index 27f2a7bb5a4a..6c6c51b4cf46 100644
--- a/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst
+++ b/Documentation/rust/coding-guidelines.rst
@@ -85,6 +85,18 @@ written after the documentation, e.g.:
 	    // ...
 	}
 
+This applies to both public and private items. This increases consistency with
+public items, allows changes to visibility with less changes involved and will
+allow us to potentially generate the documentation for private items as well.
+In other words, if documentation is written for a private item, then ``///``
+should still be used. For instance:
+
+.. code-block:: rust
+
+	/// My private function.
+	// TODO: ...
+	fn f() {}
+
 One special kind of comments are the ``// SAFETY:`` comments. These must appear
 before every ``unsafe`` block, and they explain why the code inside the block is
 correct/sound, i.e. why it cannot trigger undefined behavior in any case, e.g.:

base-commit: c1b4071ec3a6a594df6c49bf8f04a60a88072525
-- 
2.49.0