From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161133AbXAEPLI (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2007 10:11:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161087AbXAEPLH (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2007 10:11:07 -0500 Received: from nic.NetDirect.CA ([216.16.235.2]:43788 "EHLO rubicon.netdirect.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161136AbXAEPLG (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2007 10:11:06 -0500 X-Originating-Ip: 74.109.98.100 Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 10:03:53 -0500 (EST) From: "Robert P. J. Day" X-X-Sender: rpjday@localhost.localdomain To: Linux kernel mailing list cc: Randy Dunlap Subject: [PATCH] Discuss a couple common errors in kernel-doc usage. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-16.8, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -1.80, BAYES_00 -15.00) X-Net-Direct-Inc-MailScanner-From: rpjday@mindspring.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Explain a couple of the most common errors in kernel-doc usage. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day --- seems useful to emphasize these issues since they occur occasionally in the source. diff --git a/Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt b/Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt index 284e7e1..ba50129 100644 --- a/Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt +++ b/Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt @@ -107,10 +107,14 @@ The format of the block comment is like this: * (section header: (section description)? )* (*)?*/ -The short function description cannot be multiline, but the other -descriptions can be (and they can contain blank lines). Avoid putting a -spurious blank line after the function name, or else the description will -be repeated! +The short function description ***cannot be multiline***, but the other +descriptions can be (and they can contain blank lines). If you continue +that initial short description onto a second line, that second line will +appear further down at the beginning of the description section, which is +almost certainly not what you had in mind. + +Avoid putting a spurious blank line after the function name, or else the +description will be repeated! All descriptive text is further processed, scanning for the following special patterns, which are highlighted appropriately. @@ -121,6 +125,31 @@ patterns, which are highlighted appropriately. '@parameter' - name of a parameter '%CONST' - name of a constant. +NOTE 1: The multi-line descriptive text you provide does *not* recognize +line breaks, so if you try to format some text nicely, as in: + + Return codes + 0 - cool + 1 - invalid arg + 2 - out of memory + +this will all run together and produce: + + Return codes 0 - cool 1 - invalid arg 2 - out of memory + +NOTE 2: 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 means you should similarly try to avoid text +like: + + Return codes: + 0: cool + 1: invalid arg + 2: out of memory + +every line of which would start a new section. Again, probably not +what you were after. + Take a look around the source tree for examples.