Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] genalloc: track beginning of allocations
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:     <willy@infradead.org>, <rdunlap@infradead.org>, <corbet@lwn.net>,
        <keescook@chromium.org>, <mhocko@kernel.org>, <labbott@redhat.com>,
        <jglisse@redhat.com>, <hch@infradead.org>, <cl@linux.com>,
        <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>
References: <20180211031920.3424-1-igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
 <20180211031920.3424-2-igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
 <20180211122444.GB13931@rapoport-lnx>
From:   Igor Stoppa <igor.stoppa@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <f0a244f2-f63a-376b-28f2-debbe914da34@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:17:01 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180211122444.GB13931@rapoport-lnx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 11/02/18 14:24, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 05:19:15AM +0200, Igor Stoppa wrote:
[...]

>> +/**
>> + * mem_to_units - convert references to memory into orders of allocation
> 
> Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst recommends to to include brackets
> for function comments. I haven't noticed any difference in the resulting
> html, so I'm not sure if the brackets are actually required.

This is what I see in the example from mailine docs:

/**
 * foobar() - Brief description of foobar.
 * @argument1: Description of parameter argument1 of foobar.
 * @argument2: Description of parameter argument2 of foobar.
 *
 * Longer description of foobar.
 *
 * Return: Description of return value of foobar.
 */
int foobar(int argument1, char *argument2)


What are you referring to?

[...]

>> + * @size: amount in bytes
>> + * @order: power of 2 represented by each entry in the bitmap
>> + *
>> + * Returns the number of units representing the size.
> 
> Please s/Return/Return:/

:-( I thought I had fixed them all. thanks for spotting this.

[...]

>> + * Return: If two users alter the same bit, to one it will return
>> + * remaining entries, to the other it will return 0.
> 
> And what if there are three or four concurrent users? ;-)
> 
> I believe that a more elaborate description about what happens with
> concurrent attempts to alter the bitmap would be really helpful.

ok

--
thanks, igor