2018-04-09 12:52 UTC+0200 ~ Markus Heiser <markus.hei...@darmarit.de> > >> Am 09.04.2018 um 12:08 schrieb Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>: > [...] > >>> May I completely misunderstood you, so correct my if I'am wrong: >>> >>> - ./scripts/bpf_helpers_doc.py : produces reST markup from C-comments >>> - ./scripts/kerne-doc : produces reST markup from C-comments >>> >>> IMO: both are doing the same job, so why not using kernel-doc? >> >> They are not really doing the same job, in bpf_helpers_doc.py case you don't >> want the whole header rendered, but just a fraction of it, that is, the >> single big comment which describes all BPF helper functions that a BPF >> program developer has available to use in user space - aka the entries in >> the __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER() macro; > > >> I also doubt the latter would actually qualify >> in kdoc context as some sort of a function description. > > latter .. ah, OK .. thanks for clarifying. > > -- Markus --
As Daniel explained, kernel-doc does not apply in this case, we do not have the full function prototype for eBPF helpers in the header file. But to be honest, I didn't even realise kernel-doc was available and could do something close to what I was looking for, so thanks for your feedback! :) Quentin -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
