Re: [PATCH 1/3] make kernel-doc understand TRACE_EVENT() macro

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Wed Apr 29 2009 - 16:35:36 EST



* Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Jason Baron wrote:
> > Add support to kernel-doc for tracepoint comments above TRACE_EVENT()
> > macro definitions. Paves the way for tracepoint docbook.
> >
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Baron <jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > ---
> > scripts/kernel-doc | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/scripts/kernel-doc b/scripts/kernel-doc
> > index 0f11870..9d9ab4b 100755
> > --- a/scripts/kernel-doc
> > +++ b/scripts/kernel-doc
> > @@ -1827,6 +1827,24 @@ sub reset_state {
> > $state = 0;
> > }
> >
> > +sub tracepoint_munge() {
> > + my $tracepointname = 0;
> > + my $tracepointargs = 0;
> > +
> > + if($prototype =~ m/TRACE_EVENT\((.*?),/) {
> > + $tracepointname = $1;
> > + }
> > + if($prototype =~ m/TP_PROTO\((.*?)\)/) {
> > + $tracepointargs = $1;
> > + }
> > + if (($tracepointname eq 0) || ($tracepointargs eq 0)) {
> > + print STDERR "Warning: Unrecognized tracepoint format: \n" .
> > + "$prototype\n"
>
> I'd prefer for this warning to use the usual kernel-doc warning format, with
> file:line information:
>
> print STDERR "Warning(${file}:$.): Unrecognized ....

Good point - i'll wait for v2. Or would you like to carry them in
your kernel-doc tree?

This bit:

include/trace/events/irq.h | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---

Has changed in the tracing tree so it's probably better to carry it
there - once your review feedback has been addressed and once your
Acked-by is propagated into the patches.

Thanks,

Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/