[So I'm finally trying to get into this for real, hopefully I won't be interrupted too many times...expect a few mails as I catch up.]
On Fri, 20 May 2016 16:39:31 +0300 Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@intel.com> wrote: > There are a few tradeoffs, of course. First, this requires that the > EXPORT_SYMBOL markers are placed immediately after the function being > exported, as kernel-doc will only look at one file at a time. This is > the recommendation anyway. As I understand it, the technical reasons that kept some markers in separate files should no longer be relevant, so this is probably OK. It would be nice to have a sense for how many sites need to be fixed. > Second, we lose support for the !C docproc directive to check > that all kernel-doc comments in a file are used. This is probably > something we'd like to have back in the future, but at this time I think > it's an acceptable tradeoff wrt the gains. This is maybe a job for a separate tool. A related issue is the (fairly frequent) "oh look, none of the comments in $FILE are being used" realization that seems to happen fairly often. It would be nice to check for that, but that's going to be hard to shoehorn into Sphinx. jon
