On Wed, Sep 23, 2026 at 01:54:30PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Wed, 23 Sep 2026 21:19:45 +0200 > Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 23/09/2026 20:42, Stephen Hemminger: > > > The existing check-doc-vs-code.sh only compares rte_flow items and > > > actions, and only for drivers whose directory matches the ini name, > > > so none of the drivers under net/intel are checked. > > > > > > Replace it and parse-flow-support.sh with a Python script covering > > > the whole NIC feature matrix: > > [...] > > > devtools/check-doc-vs-code.py | 1132 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > devtools/check-doc-vs-code.sh | 84 -- > > > devtools/parse-flow-support.sh | 92 -- > > > doc/guides/contributing/new_driver.rst | 4 +- > > > doc/guides/contributing/patches.rst | 27 + > > > doc/guides/nics/features.rst | 5 + > > > 8 files changed, 1169 insertions(+), 180 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100755 devtools/check-doc-vs-code.py > > > delete mode 100755 devtools/check-doc-vs-code.sh > > > delete mode 100755 devtools/parse-flow-support.sh > > > > Thanks for working on it. > > > > My concern is how easy it is to maintain for all contributors > > having to insert their rules and exceptions? > > > > It is replacing less 200 lines with more than 1000 lines > > so it looks a lot more complex. > > It is probably fully generated by AI? > > Can we make it simpler? > > > > > > The other suggestion would be to git rid of the .ini file method > of generating this feature matrix in doc and just have python script > generate it. Prefer a single source of truth, less work
+1, I was just going to suggest that when I saw the discussion on this script. In case of autogeneration, for cases like "partial" support, we can have a well-defined comment tag or similar in the code to mark it. /Bruce
