From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, committers@xenproject.org,
Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com
Subject: Re: kernel-doc and xen.git
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:29:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9421ec73-1ec0-844f-0014-bd5a36a4036f@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2007291644330.1767@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s>
On 30.07.2020 03:27, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to ask for your feedback on the adoption of the kernel-doc
> format for in-code comments.
>
> In the FuSa SIG we have started looking into FuSa documents for Xen. One
> of the things we are investigating are ways to link these documents to
> in-code comments in xen.git and vice versa.
>
> In this context, Andrew Cooper suggested to have a look at "kernel-doc"
> [1] during one of the virtual beer sessions at the last Xen Summit.
>
> I did give a look at kernel-doc and it is very promising. kernel-doc is
> a script that can generate nice rst text documents from in-code
> comments. (The generated rst files can then be used as input for sphinx
> to generate html docs.) The comment syntax [2] is simple and similar to
> Doxygen:
>
> /**
> * function_name() - Brief description of function.
> * @arg1: Describe the first argument.
> * @arg2: Describe the second argument.
> * One can provide multiple line descriptions
> * for arguments.
> */
>
> kernel-doc is actually better than Doxygen because it is a much simpler
> tool, one we could customize to our needs and with predictable output.
> Specifically, we could add the tagging, numbering, and referencing
> required by FuSa requirement documents.
>
> I would like your feedback on whether it would be good to start
> converting xen.git in-code comments to the kernel-doc format so that
> proper documents can be generated out of them. One day we could import
> kernel-doc into xen.git/scripts and use it to generate a set of html
> documents via sphinx.
How far is this intended to go? The example is description of a
function's parameters, which is definitely fine (albeit I wonder
if there's a hidden implication then that _all_ functions
whatsoever are supposed to gain such comments). But the text just
says much more generally "in-code comments", which could mean all
of them. I'd consider the latter as likely going too far.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-31 11:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-30 1:27 kernel-doc and xen.git Stefano Stabellini
2020-07-30 11:13 ` George Dunlap
2020-07-30 13:07 ` Ian Jackson
2020-07-31 1:16 ` Stefano Stabellini
2020-07-31 11:29 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2020-07-31 12:48 ` Bertrand Marquis
2020-07-31 12:51 ` George Dunlap
2020-07-31 16:18 ` Stefano Stabellini
2020-07-31 13:48 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-07-31 13:50 ` Bertrand Marquis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9421ec73-1ec0-844f-0014-bd5a36a4036f@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=Bertrand.Marquis@arm.com \
--cc=committers@xenproject.org \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).