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 18EC92DF71C; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 19:36:25 +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=1755804987; cv=none; b=sIU9jWFUrhV1p+0QYd/wtcRo2XOuARITI/cI8QdXp2BnsRsoNH9BKkrdyWgiNtzYfRlbrxnMrj7n1cEwTau6ZDTTDny/a/0ddLPLLZmAEG5ZAosa2AAawna8MZX8fcy27rKE9kSBDGwmEeyDVA7N7y8Y2iHYM3C9l5oM53WxUNo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755804987; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uHcy2AviljsxLllJ3OPGmlhzgQEqdyQntMpt5D8c29U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=gUySWPo1uBnKbs5CqjidSRiWLcB+5o3aIInQ8tlhNfaNIV53KXSJ35Wl6w+Nj/M2+HrMnu8EMgv8MOExlaumUmi2v+u3aZcgPksHzKfDAhrCsbwDV+1eDEcdNPcj7qNgiikv2loJdIlkgoDAaNBp5oUbDjUCziL7kxOIdAHzs6Q= 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=fj06HT0d; 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="fj06HT0d" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net E418940AD5 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1755804985; bh=pmY6KG+wTzJ4LEBx4m1XWQJtkWHMxxgvsD7nwMl8SYQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=fj06HT0d89qImOAXo2ani3JiR3pwXraPM90AW8x5eBBe06pZLslh/l+Dy/mosefIZ KUNfFJuD85Srygk0zFJFWEUF0aLMZv5Dc3lE+ygdvu/qLQQ+L/ezSqndfEs2QIzMMO JnS5r+qmyqe0vjCcKpytc3hBr/q49ZSVLfSN6qIJAzCoEuS9AgbPwJiR40UWbzfUrR 2gZ8jieG/K2QGowQSYwZIwpkylpTZ3cQkRDizGd6mGSCKRjgggxghAhiA4bJ2PgUJb 1B50cqbzdWrtEZ5swW7IH2dio9/CcRlVSfncaKFcgsJrNxPWxIjb/Hhp2lU9N8VOC9 C8y1dNTHIWmqw== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:2da9::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E418940AD5; Thu, 21 Aug 2025 19:36:24 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Linux Doc Mailing List Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab , =?utf-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6r?= =?utf-8?Q?n?= Roy Baron , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Alex Gaynor , Alice Ryhl , Andreas Hindborg , Benno Lossin , Boqun Feng , Danilo Krummrich , Gary Guo , Miguel Ojeda , Trevor Gross , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/11] scripts: sphinx-build-wrapper: add a wrapper for sphinx-build In-Reply-To: <88a95c7f6996cafb247d6706060173b17a46d570.1755258303.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org> References: <88a95c7f6996cafb247d6706060173b17a46d570.1755258303.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 13:36:24 -0600 Message-ID: <87v7mg5ux3.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 Mauro Carvalho Chehab writes: > There are too much magic inside docs Makefile to properly run > sphinx-build. Create an ancillary script that contains all > kernel-related sphinx-build call logic currently at Makefile. So I am just now looking at the script and seeking to understand it, but one thing has jumped at me that I wanted to toss out there... > +# Minimal supported Python version needed by Sphinx and its extensions > +MIN_PYTHON_VERSION = parse_version("3.7") > + > +# Default value for --venv parameter > +VENV_DEFAULT = "sphinx_latest" > + > +# List of make targets and its corresponding builder and output directory > +TARGETS = { We don't at this point have a formal coding standard for Python code, but I do think that we should, to the extent possible, stick to the rules that have been established for C code. One thing I would really like to see is in the comment style; our rules want: /* * ...C comments spread out with the markers on separate lines * like this... */ so can we do something similar for Python? # # Markers above and below # I will confess that this matches my personal subject preference, but it also brings us closer to what our C code looks like. (I don't know that I would push to redo everything to match that style, but instead to move that way going forward). Thanks, jon