Message ID | alpine.DEB.2.21.2010201646370.12247@sstabellini-ThinkPad-T480s (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
On 21/10/2020 01:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > Hi all, > > This patch series converts Xen in-code comments to the kernel-doc (and > doxygen) format: > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/doc-guide/kernel-doc.html > > Please note that this patch series is meant as groundwork. The end goal > is to enable a more sophisticated documents generation with doxygen, > see: https://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=160220627022339 > > > # Changes compared to v1: > - addressed review comments > - use oneline comments even for nested struct members On the whole, good. However, there is one thing which problematic. Right from patch 1, you start breaking the content used to render https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/hypercall/index.html Either the patches need to incrementally feed the converted files into Sphinx directly (possibly with some one-time plumbing ahead of time), or patch 1 needs to be some script in docs/ capable of rendering kernel-doc to HTML, so we at least keep the plain docs around until the Sphinx integration is complete. i.e. don't cause what we currently have to fall off https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/ entirely as a consequence of this series. ~Andrew
On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 21/10/2020 01:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > This patch series converts Xen in-code comments to the kernel-doc (and > > doxygen) format: > > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/doc-guide/kernel-doc.html > > > > Please note that this patch series is meant as groundwork. The end goal > > is to enable a more sophisticated documents generation with doxygen, > > see: https://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=160220627022339 > > > > > > # Changes compared to v1: > > - addressed review comments > > - use oneline comments even for nested struct members > > On the whole, good. > > However, there is one thing which problematic. Right from patch 1, you > start breaking the content used to render > https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/hypercall/index.html > > Either the patches need to incrementally feed the converted files into > Sphinx directly (possibly with some one-time plumbing ahead of time), or > patch 1 needs to be some script in docs/ capable of rendering kernel-doc > to HTML, so we at least keep the plain docs around until the Sphinx > integration is complete. > > i.e. don't cause what we currently have to fall off > https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/ entirely as a consequence of this series. Thanks for pointing this out, it was not my intention. In fact, I wasn't aware of https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/hypercall/index.html at all. How is it generated? I am asking because I need to understand how that works in order not to break it... Is it just a matter of retaining the keywords like `incontents 50 and other comments starting with ` ? Otherwise, yes, I could add kernel-doc to docs/ or scripts/ to generate markdown documents, which could be turned to HTML with Sphynx.
On 21/10/2020 23:08, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2020, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> On 21/10/2020 01:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> This patch series converts Xen in-code comments to the kernel-doc (and >>> doxygen) format: >>> >>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/doc-guide/kernel-doc.html >>> >>> Please note that this patch series is meant as groundwork. The end goal >>> is to enable a more sophisticated documents generation with doxygen, >>> see: https://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=160220627022339 >>> >>> >>> # Changes compared to v1: >>> - addressed review comments >>> - use oneline comments even for nested struct members >> On the whole, good. >> >> However, there is one thing which problematic. Right from patch 1, you >> start breaking the content used to render >> https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/hypercall/index.html >> >> Either the patches need to incrementally feed the converted files into >> Sphinx directly (possibly with some one-time plumbing ahead of time), or >> patch 1 needs to be some script in docs/ capable of rendering kernel-doc >> to HTML, so we at least keep the plain docs around until the Sphinx >> integration is complete. >> >> i.e. don't cause what we currently have to fall off >> https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/ entirely as a consequence of this series. > Thanks for pointing this out, it was not my intention. In fact, I wasn't > aware of https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/unstable/hypercall/index.html at > all. How is it generated? I am asking because I need to understand how > that works in order not to break it... docs/xen-headers which is a random perl script suffering from NIH-syndrome in a world with many far better alternatives. > Is it just a matter of retaining the keywords like `incontents 50 and other > comments starting with ` ? I deliberately tried not to specify that "it should remain as is". I will happily delete this script and infrastructure if you don't beat me too it first, and it was one of my goals of suggesting kernel-doc in the first place. After all, our longterm goal is to move fully over to Sphinx. If that means maintaining both the legacy and the new side-by-side, fine. If it means moving one single header at a time fully into sphinx, also fine. (Observe that https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/latest/ is Sphinx rendered from staging). I certainly don't intend for the docs to survive in their current form forever. All I want to avoid is that the hypercall documentation disappears entirely from https://xenbits.xen.org/docs/ in the interim. ~Andrew