Re: [PATCH 04/14] ABI: better identificate tables

From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
	Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@s-opensource.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Stefan Achatz <erazor_de@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/14] ABI: better identificate tables
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:16:28 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190620141628.71157dda@coco.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190620162945.GC23052@kroah.com>

Em Thu, 20 Jun 2019 18:29:45 +0200
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> escreveu:

> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:20:34AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Em Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:54:13 +0200
> > Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> escreveu:
> >   
> > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 02:01:50PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:  
> > > > > I don't know when "Description" and "RST-Description" would be used.
> > > > > Why not just parse "Description" like rst text and if things are "messy"
> > > > > we fix them up as found, like you did with the ":" here?  It doesn't
> > > > > have to be complex, we can always fix them up after-the-fact if new
> > > > > stuff gets added that doesn't quite parse properly.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Just like we do for most kernel-doc formatting :)    
> > > > 
> > > > But kernel-doc has a documented format, which was sort of the point I
> > > > was trying to make. If the new get_abi.pl scripts expects a colon I
> > > > think it should be mentioned somewhere (e.g. Documentation/ABI/README).
> > > > 
> > > > Grepping for attribute entries in linux-next still reveals a number
> > > > descriptions that still lack that colon and use varying formatting. More
> > > > are bound to be added later, but perhaps that's ok depending on what
> > > > you're aiming at here.    
> > > 
> > > I'm aiming for "good enough" to start with, and then we can work through
> > > the exceptions.
> > > 
> > > But given that Mauro hasn't resent the script that does the conversion
> > > of the files, I don't know if that will even matter... {hint}  
> > 
> > It sounds I missed something... are you expecting a new version?   
> 
> Yes, the last round of patches didn't have a SPDX header on the script,
> so I couldn't add it to the tree :(

I could swear I sent you a version with SPDX on it... anyway, I'm
re-sending the hole thing. The SPDX header addition is on a separate
patch.

Thanks,
Mauro