From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753385Ab3IQTYW (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:24:22 -0400 Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:55221 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752981Ab3IQTYV (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 15:24:21 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 20:23:55 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Randy Dunlap Cc: LKML , Linus Torvalds , Liam Girdwood , Wu Fengguang Message-ID: <20130917192355.GK21013@sirena.org.uk> References: <5237AB72.5020806@infradead.org> <20130917103238.GM21013@sirena.org.uk> <52388CC4.7040101@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52388CC4.7040101@infradead.org> X-Cookie: Give him an evasive answer. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 94.175.92.69 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fix fatal kernel-doc error X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:57:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on cassiel.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 10:09:24AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 09/17/13 03:32, Mark Brown wrote: > > Applied with the first line redone, but this seems like really terrible > > quality of implementation for the kernel-doc stuff - it shouldn't > > explode over something readily copable with like this. Should we also > > not pick this sort of thing up in -next? > /** means kernel-doc syntax and it was not in proper kernel-doc format, > but maybe it could just be a Warning instead of a fatal Error. Yes, that's what I'm saying - it really doesn't seem like something that should be a fatal error, that's far too fragile. > Ideally we should pick it up in -next, of course, but I doubt that anyone > is running kernel-doc on linux-next. I used to do that, but there are > too many errors/warnings. I suppose that I could just concentrate on > (fatal) Errors in linux-next and ignore the Warnings. Could these checks be added to Fengguang's tester? If nobody's looking at the output (I've never found the processed output useful myself) or running the tool then it's a bit worrying... --9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.21 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSOKxIAAoJELSic+t+oim9RjMP/364kI2wVS9KZ2a6O0FMdVwj vo6MuQi+o1gIsOGsP249P4L1zjY8eAJxJ6kK/k5qe3NVfvlI6szWE9kYUhuUoZC8 en+HlW7hrBxxZKS88jrS9NAusGJ511ZCCHbXPMGeYGnUVXImNXQVGS0YCd5Ysgea DYvAJlQ2uIyV2M82p9niBG2a8a3yJYUde4Q+NwwOj35dHoSpnhD+Knzpih5+b7Ks qcXkhy844xcOZnOTk0HqKmYKWSAXr1J7T7Vvj4Ud6wRSET7pNQZWQjhqhaLxojRc OUZsBpz13AkoPDs7qb7iQUgqyiy7hDm6on3muDiOYNv2ftOodFX8/pqEr4KgEcdW i7xClK3JvzW/fq4158bMQr+/LoowZqLmlv1pnRDyULyd5SoOX4RzAXoRprBcaGce 5cOODlyiJrziwQspGQ+7+LC4VnjgVcOO94yNY0kTgW+WWokYbamb3HmfGW39R2Ab LAsive34P40YqExEgDyQ+flohmSwoJ/HOXYv2NRGEey5+RF7FkHVYDFORZd248hx ZPWoCCMJX3mO2ssARwn+qee+N/2nj+HKVr645Fx4oP/Kro2f6O9cINS9+beI3D1j 1bG5ZHR57IPC7KiRoz/g/yWdNX2tv+oiBuTyk2jIt8sLMX4hYQVh5v3/cjzW4Db1 7H3MeZAgGElSOh2GPY+a =4ReZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --9SzJfJEKNI6APITJ--