Address comments

- Removed the duplicate `ConflictingMarkers` section from the linters documentation.
- Eliminated the optional `Doc` field from the `ConflictingMarkersConfig` struct.
- Added a new test case for a subset of conflicting markers in the test data.

Author: yongruilin

docs/linters.md

@@ -18,7 +18,6 @@
 - [StatusOptional](#statusoptional) - Ensures status fields are marked as optional
 - [StatusSubresource](#statussubresource) - Validates status subresource configuration
 - [UniqueMarkers](#uniquemarkers) - Ensures unique marker definitions
-- [ConflictingMarkers](#conflictingmarkers) - Detects and reports when mutually exclusive markers are used on the same field
 
 ## Conditions
 
@@ -390,57 +389,3 @@ Taking the example configuration from above:
 - Marker definitions of `custom:SomeCustomMarker:fruit=apple,color=red` and `custom:SomeCustomMarker:fruit=orange,color=red` would _not_ violate the uniqueness requirement.
 
 Each entry in `customMarkers` must have a unique `identifier`.
-
-## ConflictingMarkers
-
-The `conflictingmarkers` linter detects and reports when mutually exclusive markers are used on the same field.
-This prevents common configuration errors and unexpected behavior in Kubernetes API types.
-
-The linter reports issues when markers from two or more sets of a conflict definition are present on the same field.
-It does NOT report issues when multiple markers from the same set are present - only when markers from
-different sets within the same conflict definition are found together.
-
-The linter is configurable and allows users to define sets of conflicting markers.
-Each conflict set must specify:
-- A unique name for the conflict
-- Multiple sets of markers that are mutually exclusive with each other (at least 2 sets)
-- A description explaining why the markers conflict
-
-### Configuration
-
-```yaml
-lintersConfig:
-  conflictingmarkers:
-    conflicts:
-      - name: "optional_vs_required"
-        sets:
-          - ["optional", "+kubebuilder:validation:Optional", "+k8s:validation:optional"]
-          - ["required", "+kubebuilder:validation:Required", "+k8s:validation:required"]
-        description: "A field cannot be both optional and required"
-      - name: "default_vs_required"
-        sets:
-          - ["default", "+kubebuilder:default"]
-          - ["required", "+kubebuilder:validation:Required", "+k8s:validation:required"]
-        description: "A field with a default value cannot be required"
-      - name: "three_way_conflict"
-        sets:
-          - ["marker5", "marker6"]
-          - ["marker7", "marker8"]
-          - ["marker9", "marker10"]
-        description: "Three-way conflict between marker sets"
-      - name: "mutually_exclusive_validation"
-        sets:
-          - ["optional", "+kubebuilder:validation:Optional"]
-          - ["required", "+kubebuilder:validation:Required"]
-          - ["default", "+kubebuilder:default"]
-        description: "A field cannot be optional, required, and have a default value"
-      - name: "my_custom_conflict"
-        sets:
-          - ["custom:marker1", "custom:marker2"]
-          - ["custom:marker3", "custom:marker4"]
-        description: "These markers conflict because..."
-```
-
-**Note**: This linter is not enabled by default and must be explicitly enabled in the configuration.
-
-The linter does not provide automatic fixes as it cannot determine which conflicting marker should be removed.

pkg/analysis/conflictingmarkers/analyzer.go

@@ -53,15 +53,9 @@ func newAnalyzer(cfg *ConflictingMarkersConfig) *analysis.Analyzer {
 		conflictSets: cfg.Conflicts,
 	}
 
-	// Use configured documentation or fall back to default
-	doc := cfg.Doc
-	if doc == "" {
-		doc = "Check that fields do not have conflicting markers from mutually exclusive sets"
-	}
-
 	return &analysis.Analyzer{
 		Name:     name,
-		Doc:      doc,
+		Doc:      "Check that fields do not have conflicting markers from mutually exclusive sets",
 		Run:      a.run,
 		Requires: []*analysis.Analyzer{inspector.Analyzer},
 	}

pkg/analysis/conflictingmarkers/config.go

@@ -17,9 +17,6 @@ package conflictingmarkers
 
 // ConflictingMarkersConfig contains the configuration for the conflictingmarkers linter.
 type ConflictingMarkersConfig struct {
-	// Doc is the documentation string for the analyzer.
-	// If not provided, a default description will be used.
-	Doc string `json:"doc"`
 	// Conflicts allows users to define sets of conflicting markers.
 	// Each entry defines a conflict between multiple sets of markers.
 	Conflicts []ConflictSet `json:"conflicts"`

pkg/analysis/conflictingmarkers/doc.go

@@ -35,8 +35,6 @@ Example configuration:
 lintersConfig:
 
 	conflictingmarkers:
-	  # Optional: Custom documentation for the analyzer
-	  doc: "Custom analyzer description for conflicting markers"
 	  conflicts:
 	    - name: "optional_vs_required"
 	      sets:
@@ -53,7 +51,6 @@ lintersConfig:
 ```
 
 Configuration options:
-- `doc`: Optional custom documentation string for the analyzer. If not provided, a default description will be used.
 - `conflicts`: Required list of conflict set definitions.
 
 Note: This linter is not enabled by default and must be explicitly enabled in the configuration.

pkg/analysis/conflictingmarkers/testdata/src/a/a.go

@@ -57,4 +57,8 @@ type TestStruct struct {
 	// +marker10
 	ThreeWayMultipleMarkersField string `json:"threeWayMultipleMarkersField"` // want "field ThreeWayMultipleMarkersField has conflicting markers: three_way_conflict: \\{\\[marker5 marker6\\], \\[marker7 marker8\\], \\[marker10 marker9\\]\\}. Three-way conflict between marker sets"
 
+	// Three-way conflict with only subset of sets triggered (sets 1 and 2 only)
+	// +marker5
+	// +marker7
+	SubsetThreeWayConflictField string `json:"subsetThreeWayConflictField"` // want "field SubsetThreeWayConflictField has conflicting markers: three_way_conflict: \\{\\[marker5\\], \\[marker7\\]\\}. Three-way conflict between marker sets"
 }