From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751627AbZH1JQ5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:16:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751593AbZH1JQ4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:16:56 -0400 Received: from xc.sipsolutions.net ([83.246.72.84]:56927 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751237AbZH1JQy (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2009 05:16:54 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] module: preferred way to use MODULE_AUTHOR From: Johannes Berg To: trivial@kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel , Luciano Coelho Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 11:16:24 +0200 Message-Id: <1251450984.3456.3.camel@johannes.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.27.91 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org For the longest time now we've been using multiple MODULE_AUTHOR() statements when a module has more than one author, but the comment here disagrees. Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg --- include/linux/module.h | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) --- wireless-testing.orig/include/linux/module.h 2009-08-28 11:12:34.000000000 +0200 +++ wireless-testing/include/linux/module.h 2009-08-28 11:13:52.000000000 +0200 @@ -127,7 +127,10 @@ extern struct module __this_module; */ #define MODULE_LICENSE(_license) MODULE_INFO(license, _license) -/* Author, ideally of form NAME[, NAME]*[ and NAME] */ +/* + * Author(s), use "Name " or just "Name", for multiple + * authors use multiple MODULE_AUTHOR() statements/lines. + */ #define MODULE_AUTHOR(_author) MODULE_INFO(author, _author) /* What your module does. */