Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]> writes: > The regular expression currently expects a single word for the > type, but it may be something like "struct foo". > > Add support for it. > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[email protected]> > Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]> > Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]> > Reviewed-by: Aleksandr Loktionov <[email protected]> > --- > tools/lib/python/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/lib/python/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py > b/tools/lib/python/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py > index 39ff27d421eb..22a820d33dc8 100644 > --- a/tools/lib/python/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py > +++ b/tools/lib/python/kdoc/kdoc_parser.py > @@ -1018,14 +1018,14 @@ class KernelDoc: > > default_val = None > > - r= KernRe(OPTIONAL_VAR_ATTR + > r"[\w_]*\s+(?:\*+)?([\w_]+)\s*[\d\]\[]*\s*(=.*)?") > + r= KernRe(OPTIONAL_VAR_ATTR + > r"\s*[\w_\s]*\s+(?:\*+)?([\w_]+)\s*[\d\]\[]*\s*(=.*)?")
Just for future reference...I *really* think that the code is improved by breaking up and commenting gnarly regexes like this. They are really unreadable in this form. (And yes, I know the code has been full of these forever, but we can always try to make it better :) Anyway, just grumbling. Thanks, jon
