Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-11659-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <0579ecd5-1335-4010-a32c-77dd4caf3411@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 2023 11:49:47 -0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] drm/i915/perf: reconcile Excess struct member
 kernel-doc warnings
Content-Language: en-US
To: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
 intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
References: <20231221032029.30942-1-rdunlap@infradead.org>
 <20231221032029.30942-4-rdunlap@infradead.org> <ZYsH757tT6sdSjDI@intel.com>
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZYsH757tT6sdSjDI@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 12/26/23 09:05, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 07:20:29PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> Document nested struct members with full names as described in
>> Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst.
>>
>> i915_perf_types.h:341: warning: Excess struct member 'ptr_lock' description in 'i915_perf_stream'
>> i915_perf_types.h:341: warning: Excess struct member 'head' description in 'i915_perf_stream'
>> i915_perf_types.h:341: warning: Excess struct member 'tail' description in 'i915_perf_stream'
>> 3 warnings as Errors
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
>> Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
>> Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@linux.intel.com>
>> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
>> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
>> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
> 
> 
> for the series:
> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>
> 
> I'm afraid patchwork was down when you sent this out.
> Could you please rebase and resend? Just to ensure
> our CI doesn't complain and then we push it.
> 

Will do. Thanks.

-- 
#Randy