On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 11:17:12AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:49:29AM +0300, Jani Nikula wrote: > > On Tue, 15 Apr 2025, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@intel.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 10:01:04AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > >> On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 09:17:51AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > >> > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevche...@intel.com> writes: > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 12:30:00PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > >> > >> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+hua...@kernel.org> writes: > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > This changeset contains the kernel-doc.py script to replace the > > >> > >> > verable > > >> > >> > kernel-doc originally written in Perl. It replaces the first > > >> > >> > version and the > > >> > >> > second series I sent on the top of it. > > >> > >> > > >> > >> OK, I've applied it, looked at the (minimal) changes in output, and > > >> > >> concluded that it's good - all this stuff is now in docs-next. Many > > >> > >> thanks for doing this! > > >> > >> > > >> > >> I'm going to hold off on other documentation patches for a day or > > >> > >> two > > >> > >> just in case anything turns up. But it looks awfully good. > > >> > > > > >> > > This started well, until it becomes a scripts/lib/kdoc. > > >> > > So, it makes the `make O=...` builds dirty *). Please make sure this > > >> > > doesn't leave > > >> > > "disgusting turd" )as said by Linus) in the clean tree. > > >> > > > > >> > > *) it creates that __pycache__ disaster. And no, .gitignore IS NOT a > > >> > > solution. > > >> > > > >> > If nothing else, "make cleandocs" should clean it up, certainly. > > >> > > > >> > We can also tell CPython to not create that directory at all. I'll run > > >> > some tests to see what the effect is on the documentation build times; > > >> > I'm guessing it will not be huge... > > >> > > >> I do not build documentation at all, it's just a regular code build that > > >> leaves > > >> tree dirty. > > >> > > >> $ python3 --version > > >> Python 3.13.2 > > >> > > >> It's standard Debian testing distribution, no customisation in the code. > > >> > > >> To reproduce. > > >> 1) I have just done a new build to reduce the churn, so, running make > > >> again does nothing; > > >> 2) The following snippet in shell shows the issue > > >> > > >> $ git clean -xdf > > >> $ git status --ignored > > >> On branch ... > > >> nothing to commit, working tree clean > > >> > > >> $ make LLVM=-19 O=.../out W=1 C=1 CF=-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__ -j64 > > >> make[1]: Entering directory '...' > > >> GEN Makefile > > >> DESCEND objtool > > >> CALL .../scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > >> INSTALL libsubcmd_headers > > >> .pylintrc: warning: ignored by one of the .gitignore files > > >> Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready (#23) > > >> make[1]: Leaving directory '...' > > >> > > >> $ touch drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > >> > > >> $ make LLVM=-19 O=.../out W=1 C=1 CF=-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__ -j64 > > >> make[1]: Entering directory '...' > > >> GEN Makefile > > >> DESCEND objtool > > >> CALL .../scripts/checksyscalls.sh > > >> INSTALL libsubcmd_headers > > >> ... > > >> OBJCOPY arch/x86/boot/setup.bin > > >> BUILD arch/x86/boot/bzImage > > >> Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready (#24) > > >> make[1]: Leaving directory '...' > > >> > > >> $ git status --ignored > > >> On branch ... > > >> Untracked files: > > >> (use "git add <file>..." to include in what will be committed) > > >> scripts/lib/kdoc/__pycache__/ > > >> > > >> nothing added to commit but untracked files present (use "git add" to > > >> track) > > > > > > FWIW, I repeated this with removing the O=.../out folder completely, so > > > it's > > > fully clean build. Still the same issue. > > > > > > And it appears at the very beginning of the build. You don't need to wait > > > to > > > have the kernel to be built actually. > > > > kernel-doc gets run on source files for W=1 builds. See Makefile.build. > > Thanks for the clarification, so we know that it runs and we know that it has > an issue.
Ideal solution what would I expect is that the cache folder should respect the given O=... argument, or disabled at all (but I don't think the latter is what we want as it may slow down the build). > > >> It's 100% reproducible on my side. I am happy to test any patches to fix > > >> this. > > >> It's really annoying "feature" for `make O=...` builds. Also note that > > >> theoretically the Git worktree may be located on read-only storage / > > >> media > > >> and this can induce subtle issues. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
