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> <CAKXUXMxWOvM5HRwmAAWEsqQc2k6_ReqRw0uD=VANLO5D7OpFtg@mail.gmail.com>
 <87o8fgpbpx.fsf@meer.lwn.net> <99a21e10-266e-b997-7048-c29a570afe0b@gmail.com>
 <30051ed8-33e4-a303-199c-f4bdcb0e448a@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <30051ed8-33e4-a303-199c-f4bdcb0e448a@gmail.com>
From:   Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 20 Mar 2021 14:21:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKXUXMyQRY9GC7sUG+_W5hQe3EFdvxKrYTEO7JL3E5LD3cCPKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] scripts: kernel-doc: avoid warnings due to initial
 commented lines in file
To:     Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@gmail.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        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 Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 1:45 PM Aditya Srivastava <yashsri421@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 20/3/21 12:23 pm, Aditya wrote:
> > On 18/3/21 11:48 pm, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> >> Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> writes:
> >>
> >>> 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.
> >>
> >> I really don't think we need that kind of heuristic.  The format of
> >> kerneldoc comments is fairly rigid; it shouldn't be too hard to pick out
> >> the /** comments that don't fit that format, right?  Am I missing
> >> something there?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> jon
> >>
>
> Hi Lukas and Jon!
> I have a question, should I clean up the files with '/**' like
> comments in only header lines? Or as we are planning for making it
> generic, for other lines as well?
>

Aditya, of course, if you can detect and come across some unintended
'/**' comments in some files, clean them in the same go (as you did
with ecryptfs).

I am just worried that if you extend it to the fully generic case,
that the list of cases simply explodes: showing many 1,000 cases
across various 1,000 files that need to be cleaned up, and such
clean-up work is just too much to get done by yourself.

The current list limited to comments in header lines seems to be a set
of patches that you can probably get done.

Lukas