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;
Date:   Wed, 9 May 2018 14:22:21 +0200
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>,
        linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/18] mtd: rawnand.h: use nested union kernel-doc
 markups
Message-ID: <20180509142221.0fef7d1f@bbrezillon>
In-Reply-To: <20180509091034.58dadd12@vento.lan>
References: <cover.1525684985.git.mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
        <39d8d4f0e0ff5a06be0303f7f4f2eac5fb45b9ca.1525684985.git.mchehab+samsung@kernel.org>
        <20180507114650.171edcc2@bbrezillon>
        <20180507083232.5a084ba7@vento.lan>
        <20180509091034.58dadd12@vento.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 9 May 2018 09:10:34 -0300
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi Boris,
> 
> Em Mon, 7 May 2018 08:32:32 -0300
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@kernel.org> escreveu:
> 
> > Hi Boris,
> > 
> > Em Mon, 7 May 2018 11:46:50 +0200
> > Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@bootlin.com> escreveu:  
> 
> > > Is there a simple
> > > way we can get rid of the warning we have when not describing timings
> > > but all of its fields?    
> > 
> > There's no direct way. It won't be hard to add a way to do it,
> > like applying the enclosed patch with ends by declaring timings as:
> > 
> > 	* @timings:	 -- undescribed --
> > 
> > IMHO, this is uglier.  
> 
> Didn't hear from you.

I replied just a few minutes ago ;).

> What do you prefer for me to do with regards to
> this patch? 

Will queue the initial patch to nand/next (I can also queue it to the
fixes branch if you prefer).