Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] scripts/get_feat.pl: allow output the parsed
 file names
In-Reply-To: <20220326003050.50750c75@coco.lan>
References: <cover.1648216561.git.mchehab@kernel.org>
 <a924b46a80d750d808c28a27adffaa5d5a983e5c.1648216561.git.mchehab@kernel.org>
 <874k3lg7r3.fsf@meer.lwn.net> <20220326002109.2cda0402@coco.lan>
 <20220326003050.50750c75@coco.lan>
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 18:02:09 -0600
Message-ID: <874k3ld1j2.fsf@meer.lwn.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org> writes:

> Btw, maybe we could replace them tree with a Sphinx comment, like:
>
> get_feat.pl:
> 	.. FILE <file_name>
> kernel-doc:
> 	.. LINE <line_number>
> get_abi.pl:
> 	.. FILE_LINE <file_name>:<line_number>
>
> (or something similar)
>
> Just let me know what you prefer and I can take care of the needed
> changes on this patch and, if it is the case, writing the extra patches
> in order to use the same model on kernel-doc and get_abi.pl.

If it were just me, I'd just put "FILE <name>" or something simple.

I don't really have a strong opinion on the matter though; it's not like
people have to actually look at these things.  I was mostly curious as
to why you'd done it that way.  I can take the original patches or any
of the variants above; just let me know which you like best and we'll
get this done.

Thanks,

jon