From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A91313B95F7 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2026 14:53:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773240803; cv=none; b=OC0QxGJTzgRBYKOfNsCuuGFSOxpqOEnAEENRBe0AcFcyHoM2hAYTSX3iYkPjwF2I98+j2awlsiLqfX8a9zPnDYIeoAQKS8N/bjWHHmgoeLRqg9Cb6LwR1DColr0PHSuhxt+SoDkE5syn7r3tiUWji0W4pxaKhOZTh2+9s8xcqoc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773240803; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kUX/drcT8AJ9k/CRmRx5FkHBqxUC+3JHtky/5bOV/uk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=tje3UEBflWktWJQ7ESkYT64g2FDqNzv5IexyoQRE7W3skYY15mR2LchvoxkCzaNpVQWY2NbVm1WwWE9ybuMMPybpjW3voz+UN7Z2iV+d1KLV3hU8/QACuwYQetRMslrx7aMGFp1Ueog+aFNcxuJ/NxLnTi1HsyvkCkvOsHQLMqo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=Xeh21n8n; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="Xeh21n8n" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net B24B0411E4 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1773240792; bh=3wSygD7Z64RJsFn+uCgJpBjEi8nXuzweSWGCKOJuPes=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=Xeh21n8ne2Zcv6GTOQxI8jNtkLrq1VVvlGmR4KY0avgq10dbwdWXN/otVx1OQulXe Nle5umkMPk5/zyHZFrBYx4bdUCShbyKeHpinbElxNLM9zhFPp5OfbCUzzbDquDPVIS /6xnprGcng1az5aekxc+gCeqJBqhyqEhC4q8CDv20+Bx/KhWzyze7H7J68+u8p0yd5 9TaN5XueCMjiW+bb45JNHitmMheQ5CN8j6XuTvFcFGdLT2LjZqeGxoEwBQSnIJDlja Ib6Clqt47Gq/DlFNXdlhD1xXOEZhlqW5UU8fAJo4PCFkoJ+9aVEhc7rqeUsnS4+x69 nz/3Y2JouqnrA== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:27b::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B24B0411E4; Wed, 11 Mar 2026 14:53:12 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Sanjai Cc: mchehab+huawei@kernel.org, rdunlap@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sanjai Subject: Re: [PATCH] scripts/lib/kdoc: apply pending TODO renames In-Reply-To: <20260311143255.171980-1-sanjai@myyahoo.com> References: <20260311143255.171980-1-sanjai.ref@myyahoo.com> <20260311143255.171980-1-sanjai@myyahoo.com> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 08:53:11 -0600 Message-ID: <87jyviquy0.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sanjai writes: > The TODO comments requested these renames after the removal of > kernel-doc.pl. > kernel-doc.pl was removed in commit 683e8cbaba7f > ("docs: remove kernel-doc.pl"), > > so the renames can now be applied: > > - rename emit_msg() to emit_message() > - rename output_declaration() to store_declaration() > > Signed-off-by: Sanjai > --- > tools/lib/python/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py | 86 ++++++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) Perhaps the new name is a better one, but what is the real benefit to the kernel from this much churn. That is an especially pertinent question when there is a lot of other kernel-doc work going on that will surely end up conflicting with this sort of change...? Thanks, jon