Again, text processing (as in prev. discussion)

> I can read source. But let's not pretend that "Use the Source Luke" is
> ideal. The code for nf_conntrack_helper_register() is about adding entries
> to a list. The connection tracking magic doesn't happen until a packet
> arrives and that list is searched and acted upon, which is handled in other
> code in a galaxy far, far away.

Seems like you have working source code, isn't that enough? I mean,
somebody did that for you (and many many other/users). Maybe after that
any kind of documentation writing wasn't in IWANTNOW list of the author?

It's open source, many who use, few who contribute. So it can be boring and
upsetting for particular authors. Оthers can be outraged.

> After struggling through all of this, I'll lay odds that posting the
> finished module will result in at least one put-down e-mail about some
> misuse of some Linux API.

Maybe also a documentation patch and willingness to improve the kernel,
everyone needs? I'm sure original author will be happy.

> A final thought. Is there a kernel API at all?

I think it's just hard and boring to maintain. After some repetition
almost anything in programming can be automated. It's not harvesting or
fruit/mushroom collecting, which is by far manual-only work (making a
suitable robot is more complicated than rocket science).

Any repetition is boring for human or dumbing down.

Maybe tool set must be upgraded (diff+patch in any form is technology
of 1980th)?

I've started to work with text processing to make some automation for
maintaining big changes, i.e not just one-liners, which can be grep'ed.

With some input from coding-style policy department and developers making
tags/clues comments in hard to textually analyse cases, something can be
done, and i think quite useful.

http://kernelnewbies.org/olecom

prev. comment
http://lwn.net/Articles/275780/
_____