Re: [RFC v3] scripts: kernel-doc: fix typedef support for struct/union parsing

[Aditya]

On 6/3/21 11:55 am, Lukas Bulwahn wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 5:35 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 08:20:33PM +0530, Aditya Srivastava wrote:
>>> +++ b/scripts/kernel-doc
>>> @@ -1201,12 +1201,23 @@ sub dump_union($$) {
>>>  sub dump_struct($$) {
>>>      my $x = shift;
>>>      my $file = shift;
>>> +    my $decl_type;
>>> +    my $members;
>>> +    my $type = qr{struct|union};
>>> +    # For capturing struct/union definition body, i.e. "{members*}qualifiers*"
>>> +    my $definition_body = qr{\{(.*)\}(?:\s*(?:__packed|__aligned|____cacheline_aligned_in_smp|____cacheline_aligned|__attribute__\s*\(\([a-z0-9,_\s\(\)]*\)\)))*};
>>> -    if ($x =~ /(struct|union)\s+(\w+)\s*\{(.*)\}(\s*(__packed|__aligned|____cacheline_aligned_in_smp|____cacheline_aligned|__attribute__\s*\(\([a-z0-9,_\s\(\)]*\)\)))*/) {
>>> -     my $decl_type = $1;
>>> +    if ($x =~ /($type)\s+(\w+)\s*$definition_body/) {
>>> +     $decl_type = $1;
>>>       $declaration_name = $2;
>>> -     my $members = $3;
>>> +     $members = $3;
>>> +    } elsif ($x =~ /typedef\s+($type)\s*$definition_body\s*(\w+)\s*;/) {
>>> +     $decl_type = $1;
>>> +     $declaration_name = $3;
>>> +     $members = $2;
>>> +    }
>>
>> In the same spirit as dump_function, would something like this work?
>>
> 
> I agree. That might be a suitable clean-up to keep the code for
> functions and struct/union parsing similar in style/spirit.
> 
> Aditya, would you like to create a patch for that?
> 

Sure Lukas.
I have a doubt though, Can't we use a single expression separated by
"|" here, instead of multiple lines? i.e.,

$x =~
s/__packed|__aligned|____cacheline_aligned_in_smp|____cacheline_aligned|__attribute__\s*\(\([a-z0-9,_\s\(\)]*\)\)\s*//;


Probably we could do something similar for dump_function, i.e.,
-    $prototype =~ s/^static +//;
-    $prototype =~ s/^extern +//;
-    $prototype =~ s/^asmlinkage +//;
-    $prototype =~ s/^inline +//;
-    $prototype =~ s/^__inline__ +//;
-    $prototype =~ s/^__inline +//;
-    $prototype =~ s/^__always_inline +//;
-    $prototype =~ s/^noinline +//;

+    $prototype =~
s/^(?:static|extern|asmlinkage|__?inline__?|__always_inline|noinline) +//;
And so on for other regexps.

What do you think?

Thanks
Aditya