Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754831Ab1DUVR6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:17:58 -0400 Received: from oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com ([69.89.21.11]:49751 "HELO oproxy4-pub.bluehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754109Ab1DUVR5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:17:57 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=xenotime.net; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Organization:X-Mailer:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Identified-User; b=vL+8/ZvUpcqyzk6qGdO5/3BWs+5W/qGF3SBNky+JIjIVDmBYrvYOHfvmM2XI3si8nUQsN4tHcUhm2juVjNEqeunkqbCLsQ9ctQdD57hpLEZ93zcPBJmyN63Igk2Oa7H+; Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 14:17:54 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap To: james_p_freyensee@linux.intel.com Cc: gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, suhail.ahmed@intel.com, christophe.guerard@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] Intel PTI implementaiton of MIPI 1149.7. Message-Id: <20110421141754.bfc8eb00.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <1303419999.13457.107.camel@localhost> References: <1303253889-10074-4-git-send-email-james_p_freyensee@linux.intel.com> <20110419161509.21b678d3.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <1303340700.13457.88.camel@localhost> <20110420161025.88299c36.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <1303419999.13457.107.camel@localhost> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.7.1 (GTK+ 2.16.6; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Identified-User: {1807:box742.bluehost.com:xenotime:xenotime.net} {sentby:smtp auth 50.53.38.135 authed with rdunlap@xenotime.net} Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4172 Lines: 127 On Thu, 21 Apr 2011 14:06:39 -0700 J Freyensee wrote: > On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 16:10 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:05:00 -0700 J Freyensee wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 16:15 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > > > > A couple more comments below. > > > > > > > On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:58:08 -0700 james_p_freyensee@linux.intel.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > + * @max_IDS: The max amount of available write IDs to use. > > > > > + * @baseID: The starting SW channel ID, based on the Intel > > > > > + * PTI arch. > > > > > + * > > > > > + * @return: pti_masterchannel struct containing master, channel ID address, > > > > > > > > No '@' on "return". > > > > > > Why no '@' on 'return' when just by doing a 'grep -Ri "@return" drivers/ > > > | wc -l' I count 369 examples of '@return' being used already in the > > > kernel? It looks like an acceptable format to me. > > > > It's not. See Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt. > > '@' goes on function parameters (or struct members). > > Not on return values. Those other places should be fixed, but > > it's just not a high priority thing to do. > > > > How should I document return values of functions? I would like them > documented somehow. Agreed. Just use something like: * Returns: * 0 for success * error code < 0 for errors > kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt does not say other than give examples of what > I don't want to do and to 'Take a look around the source tree for > examples'. > > So one example I found that documents return values does not seem to > follow kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt: > > (acpi/acpica/dsutils.c) > /******************************************************************************* > * > * FUNCTION: acpi_ds_clear_implicit_return > * > * PARAMETERS: walk_state - Current State > * > * RETURN: None. > * Yes, I know that there are several that don't do so. And at least in this case, they have a reason: acpica is portable code, not specific to Linux. > then another driver, net/wireless/libertas/tx.c, does exactly what I do > that I'm being advised against (minus the 's' at the end of 'return'): > > /** > * @brief This function sends to the host the last transmitted packet, > * filling the radiotap headers with transmission information. > * > * @param priv A pointer to struct lbs_private structure > * @param status A 32 bit value containing transmission status. > * > * @returns void > */ I'll be glad to send them email about this. Thanks for noticing. > > > > > + * or 0 for error. > > > > > + * > > > > > + * Each bit in the arrays ia_app and ia_os correspond to a master and > > > > > + * channel id. The bit is one if the id is taken and 0 if free. For > > > > > + * every master there are 128 channel id's. > > > > > + */ > > > > > +static struct pti_masterchannel *getID(u8 *IDarray, int max_IDS, int baseID) > > > > > +{ > > > > > > > > > +/** > > > > > + * pti_request_masterchannel() - Kernel API function used to allocate > > > > > + * a master, channel ID address to write to > > > > > + * PTI HW. > > > > > + * @type: 0- request Application master, channel aperture ID write address. > > > > > + * 1- request OS master, channel aperture ID write address. > > > > > + * 2- request Modem master, channel aperture ID write > > > > > + * address. > > > > > + * Other values, error. > > > > > + * @return: pti_masterchannel struct or 0 for error. > > > > > > > > No '@' on "return". > > > > > > Same reason here. > > > > Same answer here. > > > > > > > > > > > + * > > > > > + * @return int : Success = 0, otherwise fail. > > > > > > > > No '@' on "return". > > > > > > Same explanation as above. > > > > Same reply also. --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/