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

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> 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@redhat.com>
> > 
> > ---
> >  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