From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030263AbWFAUGo (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:06:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030265AbWFAUGo (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:06:44 -0400 Received: from xenotime.net ([66.160.160.81]:235 "HELO xenotime.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1030263AbWFAUGn (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:06:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 13:09:23 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: Anssi Hannula Cc: dtor_core@ameritech.net, linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: input: fix comments and blank lines in new ff code Message-Id: <20060601130923.38f83fb6.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <447F47FD.2050705@gmail.com> References: <20060530105705.157014000@gmail.com> <20060530110131.136225000@gmail.com> <20060530222122.069da389.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <447F3AE4.6010206@gmail.com> <20060601125256.de2897f4.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <447F47FD.2050705@gmail.com> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.5 (GTK+ 2.8.3; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 23:03:09 +0300 Anssi Hannula wrote: > Randy.Dunlap wrote: > > On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 22:07:16 +0300 Anssi Hannula wrote: > > > > > >>Fix comments so that they conform to kernel-doc and add/remove some > >>blank lines. > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Anssi Hannula > > > > > > (attachments make review/comments more trying, so this is an > > abbreviated reply) > > Sorry, I'll try to use some other client when I send the fixed patch. > > > /** > > - * Lock the mutex and check the device has not been deleted > > + * input_ff_safe_lock - lock the mutex and check for the ff_device struct > > + * > > + * Returns 0 if device still present, 1 otherwise. > > */ > > static inline int input_ff_safe_lock(struct input_dev *dev) > > { > > > > Functions that are commented with kernel-doc need all of the parameters > > documented also, like: > > > > * @dev: the input_dev (or better description) > > > > There were a few places where you had these and deleted them. :( > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > (repeat for several functions...) > > > > Ah, so if the comment is kernel-doc all parameters have to be always > documented... Right. > I guess I can just remove the double ** for static functions, as I'm not > sure it is necessary to document all the obvious parameters of those. > > Or what do you think? I think that kernel-doc is most important on non-static functions, so it would be OK to remove the ** for the static ones. --- ~Randy