Re: [RFC] Proposal to relax warnings of htmldocs

[Carlos Bilbao]

On 8/16/23 10:15, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 10:12:56AM -0500, Carlos Bilbao wrote:
> > On 8/16/23 06:01, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > What I'd hope for is build system support to enable W=1
> > > compiler/kernel-doc warnings for a subdir with a few lines at most,
> > > instead of duplicating and copy-pasting tens of lines from
> > > scripts/Makefile.extrawarn like we have to do now.
> >
> > That sounds feasible but, well, I actually proposed the opposite approach.
> > I wanted to "relax" the warnings (see RFC Subject) rather than making them
> > more strict by default.
> >
> > My concern is that W=1 (by default) may theoretically result in a clean
> > `make htmldocs` but it won't in practice. Not all developers prioritize
> > good documentation like the folks from i915, and that may lead to
> > unaddressed warnings or worst, less interest in documenting the code. Isn't
> > it the case that some of these higher-control warnings don't really have
> > much effect in real life? And shoukd W=1 become the default, are we going
> > to be able to enforce that level of control?
>
> I wasn't proposing making W=1 builds the default; I was proposing
> running kernel-doc -none at all levels.

More strict warning level, right? My concern is the same.

Thanks,
Carlos