From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [45.79.88.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 985E321A457 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:25:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756751133; cv=none; b=ad1seLr/R2tLWvExa01KWbiAD6RXw2CSWlCi/AAbdojAJ0Uo77gCVSWs2bYXBn2mB/Jl1q3ff1wqIILx3zBP9YDHYdcrepX+TCeVpyyyXR5LiivnAvCeNqhhsiV1ZZp0K0VLe08C5kl14zlIqFv9b1PqTbC2itwIR46SiRb4TlM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756751133; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3W4hGGTbEruFj1LfrqV/Q3pJt2FAoeBiajeEGf4p59Q=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=My9hgFwpG60dlKpDCr7ssa6kg9N4vsPsQTXkXqsBIFgVv1CeR5OZKCOr/4AYehWxlALcI9E+sxy4TY8/98DMCHjhBcwIss2i/l7rGFXStqxJItxMQgx/nOI+9DJY8TTbCC0ISCJKAGFOCuBKIvnsGRuaU35Im7p9WDbiT0/Jz30= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b=lxNYlVPZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.79.88.28 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lwn.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lwn.net header.i=@lwn.net header.b="lxNYlVPZ" DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 ms.lwn.net 9130540ADA DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lwn.net; s=20201203; t=1756751131; bh=oaGPk6dTWyRn6vlhNTZeRj7Z6qA87D1jM7B2dCgEYkc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=lxNYlVPZrmrVJMmfvQVlv8iKk5BwdxdK3loKrXvtbP2yFRHv3RzznzCoh5VcRkfOl wMNliNW8swkpsYsJmBFjR79Cs07n7L/vmWNvN3icBU8E5C7VmjxIOCHHLNpB/a9k// ra32jYQvzydR7WhRvoBWxjFx2XM49H430RwEn8dGFqqQO6C5vUqelUp7iKy+BPbko2 l2bU2SEYw8JDL9iJd60ZKP52+vZsBaMoDp5ATD5rOkc0eK58M/clci1NIQma6p9VRL qeB26tqoN3cSgfeNp2PMbvFH7ridB/DaUozQRDli9hYqMNjcGCIzUJetoEOOrU/ulJ ua0ReYBmtBrjg== Received: from localhost (unknown [IPv6:2601:280:4600:2da9::1fe]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9130540ADA; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:25:31 +0000 (UTC) From: Jonathan Corbet To: Mark Brown , Randy Dunlap Cc: Jani Nikula , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Laurent Pinchart , Vegard Nossum , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, Linux Documentation , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Akira Yokosawa , Bagas Sanjaya , Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [TECH TOPIC] Kernel documentation - update and future directions In-Reply-To: <2f927f53-9af5-4e0c-be8f-f7bdf90e23ff@sirena.org.uk> References: <87plcndkzs.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <20250828230104.GB26612@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <87wm6l0w2y.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <930d1b37-a588-43db-9867-4e1a58072601@oracle.com> <20250830222351.GA1705@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> <87h5xo1k6y.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> <20250831160339.2c45506c@foz.lan> <2f927f53-9af5-4e0c-be8f-f7bdf90e23ff@sirena.org.uk> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2025 12:25:30 -0600 Message-ID: <873496yqqt.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mark Brown writes: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 09:51:01AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > >> Willy had a suggestion that we just make checking kernel-doc during >> all .c builds a permanent feature instead of a W=1 option. >> This helps, but still doesn't force 'make htmldocs' to be run. > > make htmldocs is rather slow: > > $ time make -j56 htmldocs > ... > make -j56 htmldocs 2355.99s user 141.33s system 158% cpu 26:14.86 total That ... is weird... it takes me a little under 3 minutes to do an htmldocs build, using a capable but not stellar desktop machine. Which version of Sphinx are you using? If you're not on Sphinx 8, you really want to be; they finally fixed some really nasty performance problems with that release. Thanks, jon