Re: [Linux-kernel-mentees] [RFC] scripts: kernel-doc: fix typedef support for struct parsing
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Date: 2021-02-22 21:42:02
Also in:
linux-doc, lkml
Aditya Srivastava [off-list ref] writes:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
There are files in kernel, which use 'typedef struct' syntax for defining struct. For eg, include/linux/zstd.h, drivers/scsi/megaraid/mega_common.h, etc. However, kernel-doc still does not support it, causing a parsing error. For eg, running scripts/kernel-doc -none on include/linux/zstd.h emits: "error: Cannot parse struct or union!" Add support for parsing it. Signed-off-by: Aditya Srivastava <redacted> --- scripts/kernel-doc | 12 ++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/scripts/kernel-doc b/scripts/kernel-doc index 8b5bc7bf4bb8..46e904dc3f87 100755 --- a/scripts/kernel-doc +++ b/scripts/kernel-doc@@ -1201,12 +1201,20 @@ sub dump_union($$) { sub dump_struct($$) { my $x = shift; my $file = shift; + my $decl_type; + my $members; if ($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; + $decl_type = $1; $declaration_name = $2; - my $members = $3; + $members = $3; + } elsif ($x =~ /typedef\s+(struct|union)\s*\{(.*)\}(?:\s*(?:__packed|__aligned|____cacheline_aligned_in_smp|____cacheline_aligned|__attribute__\s*\(\([a-z0-9,_\s\(\)]*\)\)))*\s*(\w*)\s*;/) {
So this isn't your fault, but these regexes are really getting out of hand. I would *really* like to see some effort made into making this code more understandable / maintainable as we tweak this stuff. So: - Splitting out the common part, as suggested by Lukas, would be really useful. That would also avoid the problem of only occurrence being edited the next tine we add a new qualifier. - Splitting out other subsections of the regex and giving them symbolic names would also help. - We really could use some comments before these branches saying what they are doing; it is *not* obvious from the code. See what I'm getting at here? Thanks, jon _______________________________________________ Linux-kernel-mentees mailing list Linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-kernel-mentees