drm: Documentation style guide
Every time I type or review docs this seems a bit different. Try to document the common style so we can try to unify at least new docs. v2: Spelling fixes from Pierre, Laurent and Jani. v3: More spelling fixes from Lukas. Cc: Pierre Moreau <pierre.morrow@free.fr> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de> Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com> Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1449564561-3896-1-git-send-email-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch
This commit is contained in:
parent
36b66080dc
commit
fb9f7a6b06
|
@ -124,6 +124,43 @@
|
|||
<para>
|
||||
[Insert diagram of typical DRM stack here]
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<sect1>
|
||||
<title>Style Guidelines</title>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
For consistency this documentation uses American English. Abbreviations
|
||||
are written as all-uppercase, for example: DRM, KMS, IOCTL, CRTC, and so
|
||||
on. To aid in reading, documentations make full use of the markup
|
||||
characters kerneldoc provides: @parameter for function parameters, @member
|
||||
for structure members, &structure to reference structures and
|
||||
function() for functions. These all get automatically hyperlinked if
|
||||
kerneldoc for the referenced objects exists. When referencing entries in
|
||||
function vtables please use ->vfunc(). Note that kerneldoc does
|
||||
not support referencing struct members directly, so please add a reference
|
||||
to the vtable struct somewhere in the same paragraph or at least section.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
Except in special situations (to separate locked from unlocked variants)
|
||||
locking requirements for functions aren't documented in the kerneldoc.
|
||||
Instead locking should be check at runtime using e.g.
|
||||
<code>WARN_ON(!mutex_is_locked(...));</code>. Since it's much easier to
|
||||
ignore documentation than runtime noise this provides more value. And on
|
||||
top of that runtime checks do need to be updated when the locking rules
|
||||
change, increasing the chances that they're correct. Within the
|
||||
documentation the locking rules should be explained in the relevant
|
||||
structures: Either in the comment for the lock explaining what it
|
||||
protects, or data fields need a note about which lock protects them, or
|
||||
both.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
Functions which have a non-<code>void</code> return value should have a
|
||||
section called "Returns" explaining the expected return values in
|
||||
different cases and their meanings. Currently there's no consensus whether
|
||||
that section name should be all upper-case or not, and whether it should
|
||||
end in a colon or not. Go with the file-local style. Other common section
|
||||
names are "Notes" with information for dangerous or tricky corner cases,
|
||||
and "FIXME" where the interface could be cleaned up.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</sect1>
|
||||
</chapter>
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- Internals -->
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue