Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210309125324.4456-1-yashsri421@gmail.com> <8959bf29-9ee1-6a1d-da18-f440232864f3@darmarit.de>
 <c673e76f-72db-bbee-39d6-f5428e765173@gmail.com> <871rcg2p8g.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
 <CAKXUXMzwTp1H_vokVEAJSnmm7jNHfWzhhmLfpcrrBD9b8ak+dA@mail.gmail.com> <878s6kto3g.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
In-Reply-To: <878s6kto3g.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 18 Mar 2021 18:52:05 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKXUXMxWOvM5HRwmAAWEsqQc2k6_ReqRw0uD=VANLO5D7OpFtg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] scripts: kernel-doc: avoid warnings due to initial
 commented lines in file
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Cc:     Aditya <yashsri421@gmail.com>,
        Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@darmarit.de>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 5:37 PM Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:
>
> Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I wonder if we could extend kernel-doc (not your preferred option as
> > it seems) for a new dedicated warning message or maintain a separate
> > kernel-doc sanity checking script to emit a dedicated warning based on
> > some heuristics that suggests when a "header comment" is probably
> > unintentionally declared as a "kernel-doc comment" when it really
> > should not be.
> >
> > Jonathan, would you then prefer to have a separate kernel-doc sanity
> > checking script that then allows us to maintain checking for patterns
> > we already cleaned up?
>
> Having a warning in kernel-doc for "This comment starts with /** but
> isn't a kerneldoc comment" could be useful, I guess.  That is the real
> problem, not the fact that it appears at the top of the file.  I'm all
> for tools that help us to clean things up, but let's not add
> line-counting hacks to try to paper it over.
>

Yeah, and as this line-counting is really just a poor man's
heuristics, we might just be better to really turn this heuristics
into a dedicated cleanup warning script, then we can check for more
indicators, such as "does it contain the word Copyright" somewhere in
the kernel-doc comment, which tells us even more that this is not a
kernel-doc as we would expect it.

Aditya, would you like to try to turn this check into a separate script instead?

Lukas