From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99295C48BDF for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 07:28:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82ACB6127A for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 07:28:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230351AbhFHHaX (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2021 03:30:23 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:40350 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229518AbhFHHaU (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2021 03:30:20 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B3D5C61073; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 07:28:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1623137307; bh=O/zMXaiejHSPpLDrpWoLj5vApKw6co+rXXxeAdTs0fQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=nLlyZlZD273F402k83SpAE2/yTCnSoxOmIHbl9CNTcXkiOIJIwbU4EIxQMSt2a4ml qYAZ7+GRyFby1j7J/b6Qdg0ngb9aWUorA3LUTEzB/o7nAxtpl99tYE56SX6c/L7cnq JkQNkQc+kckZEP6v8MtI7gBXthqAyHNA2ro1bRHL944hNLYqFQNYNtkG14YdEsbCz8 WiPAfikei2ZlyE9DmtO+G5LcsEimR8Zt3bf/sh+4dSJxaQew1IHT6LAPnPOy5G3d1V 9RKb6ljsgqP02St+w9CxWqyTHfLgCquU2TvIEjFpSrPZM71r6hel2yJmUWm39106ZP ITZzuhEQ/FbwA== Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 09:28:19 +0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: "=?UTF-8?B?TsOtY29sYXM=?= F. R. A. Prado" Cc: Jonathan Corbet , Linux Doc Mailing List , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, coresight@lists.linaro.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/34] docs: avoid using ReST :doc:`foo` tag Message-ID: <20210608092819.3f4191b3@coco.lan> In-Reply-To: <20210608003458.kwhbn6mraekcutlt@notapiano> References: <20210605151109.axm3wzbcstsyxczp@notapiano> <20210605210836.540577d4@coco.lan> <20210606225225.fz4dsyz6im4bqena@notapiano> <20210607093422.0a369909@coco.lan> <20210608003458.kwhbn6mraekcutlt@notapiano> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Em Mon, 7 Jun 2021 21:34:58 -0300 N=C3=ADcolas F. R. A. Prado escreveu: > Hi Mauro, >=20 > On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 09:34:22AM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Em Sun, 6 Jun 2021 19:52:25 -0300 > > N=C3=ADcolas F. R. A. Prado escreveu: > > =20 > > > On Sat, Jun 05, 2021 at 09:08:36PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote= : =20 > > > > Em Sat, 5 Jun 2021 12:11:09 -0300 > > > > N=C3=ADcolas F. R. A. Prado escreveu: > > > > =20 > > > > > Hi Mauro, > > > > >=20 > > > > > On Sat, Jun 05, 2021 at 03:17:59PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab w= rote: =20 > > > > > > As discussed at: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/871r9k6rmy.fsf@meer.lwn.net/ > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > It is better to avoid using :doc:`foo` to refer to Documentatio= n/foo.rst, as the > > > > > > automarkup.py extension should handle it automatically, on most= cases. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > There are a couple of exceptions to this rule: > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > 1. when :doc: tag is used to point to a kernel-doc DOC: markup; > > > > > > 2. when it is used with a named tag, e. g. :doc:`some name `; > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > It should also be noticed that automarkup.py has currently an i= ssue: > > > > > > if one use a markup like: > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/test.rst > > > > > > - documents all of the standard testing API excluding mocking > > > > > > or mocking related features. > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > or, even: > > > > > >=20 > > > > > > Documentation/dev-tools/kunit/api/test.rst > > > > > > documents all of the standard testing API excluding mocking > > > > > > or mocking related features. > > > > > > =09 > > > > > > The automarkup.py will simply ignore it. Not sure why. This pat= ch series > > > > > > avoid the above patterns (which is present only on 4 files), bu= t it would be > > > > > > nice to have a followup patch fixing the issue at automarkup.py= . =20 > > > > >=20 > > > > > What I think is happening here is that we're using rST's syntax f= or definition > > > > > lists [1]. automarkup.py ignores literal nodes, and perhaps a def= inition is > > > > > considered a literal by Sphinx. Adding a blank line after the Doc= umentation/... > > > > > or removing the additional indentation makes it work, like you di= d in your > > > > > 2nd and 3rd patch, since then it's not a definition anymore, alth= ough then the > > > > > visual output is different as well. =20 > > > >=20 > > > > A literal has a different output. I think that this is not the case= , but I=20 > > > > didn't check the python code from docutils/Sphinx. =20 > > >=20 > > > Okay, I went in deeper to understand the issue and indeed it wasn't w= hat I > > > thought. The reason definitions are ignored by automarkup.py is becau= se the main > > > loop iterates only over nodes that are of type paragraph: > > >=20 > > > for para in doctree.traverse(nodes.paragraph): > > > for node in para.traverse(nodes.Text): > > > if not isinstance(node.parent, nodes.literal): > > > node.parent.replace(node, markup_refs(name, app, node= )) > > >=20 > > > And inspecting the HTML output from your example, the definition name= is inside > > > a
tag, and it doesn't have a

inside. So in summary, automark= up.py will > > > only work on elements which are inside a

in the output. =20 > >=20 > >=20 > > Yeah, that's what I was suspecting, based on the comments. > >=20 > > Maybe something similar to the above could be done also for some > > non-paragraph data. By looking at: > >=20 > > https://docutils.sourceforge.io/docs/ref/doctree.html > >=20 > > It says that the body elements are: > >=20 > > admonition, attention, block_quote, bullet_list, caution, citation,=20 > > comment, compound, container, danger, definition_list, doctest_block,= =20 > > enumerated_list, error, field_list, figure, footnote, hint, image,=20 > > important, line_block, literal_block, note, option_list, paragraph,=20 > > pending, raw, rubric, substitution_definition, system_message,=20 > > table, target, tip, warning =20 >=20 > Ok, I went through each one by searching the term on [1] and inspecting t= he > element to see if it contained a

or not. The vast majority did. These= are > the ones I didn't find there or didn't make sense: >=20 > comment > container > image > pending > raw > substitution_definition > system_message > target >=20 > We can safely ignore them. And these are the ones that matter and don't h= ave > paragraphs: >=20 > 1. literal_block > 2. doctest_block > 3. definition_list > 4. field_list > 5. option_list > 6. line_block >=20 > 1 and 2 are literals, so we don't care about them. >=20 > 3 is the one you noticed the issue with. It's worth mentioning that the > definition term doesn't have a paragraph, but its definition does (as can= be > checked by inspecting [2]). >=20 > 4 is basically the same as 3, the rst syntax is different but the output = is the > same. That said, I believe we only use those to set options at the top of= the > file, like in translations, and I can't see automarkup being useful in th= ere. >=20 > 5 is similar to 3 and 4, but the term is formatted using , so it's l= ike a > literal and therefore not relevant. >=20 > 6 is useful just to preserve indentation, and I'm pretty sure we don't us= e it in > the docs. >=20 > So in the end, I think the only contenders to be added to automarkup are > definition lists, and even then I still think we should just substitute t= hose > definition lists with alternatives like you did in your patches. Personal= ly I > don't see much gain in using definitions instead of a simple paragraph. B= ut if > you really think it's an improvement in some way, it could probably be ad= ded to > automarkup in the way you described. Thank you for checking this! Kernel docs use a lot definition lists. At the initial versions, it was equivalent to: **Something to be written with emphasis** Some description Sphinx later changed the look-and-feel for the term, on html output, but the thing is that: Something to be written with emphasis Some description looks a lot better when read as a text file. Also, on some cases, the first notation doesn't work. The definition-list was the only way I know that would allow to apply an emphasis to a literal block. We can avoid using Documentation/foo on description lists: the current 4=20 cases where doc:`foo` are already addressed in this series, and the output is acceptable. Yet, I have a couple of concerns: 1. It might have some unknown places where a description list is used for Documentation/foo; 2. It is not trivial to identify if someone add Documentation/foo in the future; 3. I suspect that there are several places where functions and structs appear at the definition lists. (1) can probably be checked with a multi-line grep. So, not a big problem; (2) is something that would require someone to verify from time to time; but (3) are harder to check and seems to be a valid use-case. Due to (3), I think we should let automarkup to parse non-literal terms on description lists. At very least it should emit a warning when it won't be doing auto-conversions for known patterns at definition lists (if doing that would generate false-positives). Thanks, Mauro