From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-181.mta1.migadu.com (out-181.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B69133B962 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 19:14:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.181 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762283673; cv=none; b=cx4lRE++9cYw/AmEjtJpJji7PL2xPmObHmCitFrFfl/N0p8XzK9UcsporV07a1UHjCObxsrG7Q5DKskVxpTckx3ZjLUfdaeC9i+uxhBKN6KDNRxmxs33SVs2quMXBo32wClKjfpiVgBn+5O5HFu+jogo2JOdvymEW1GjRik/k7Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762283673; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4HphiyOJB+DGoDMwRatATOHhn0V8FfMVXm7yAAKfASk=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=MxMKyBBTaXGRx+aNvQ7OzNjJEwnHCF6+6g1k68Zzo9vERucKCY3W1uXmXYaMcGa635w6pIq8wPAZP2fLnFfCykSrHrVxkNye3auA1ArY12KXuqQ3SG/sf+jY0MG16k4gQsCP2x+fXjsTo+v5sm9B/DBZWfAk6gLbAzXiOS1NXXQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=LOrJwED+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.181 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="LOrJwED+" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1762283658; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=teUzLVutU2wEhi59c9nxHdIb4v8e+TJnHcVw62s8I4k=; b=LOrJwED+by6PaVmR6+mElAE24+06UeYmxMy6FW9HRr/lBGFCCN4d9JewdNyIx3LzcDY31+ 2KT49ba5vSlJ0mSDqnMGFY3pQrWFW4nxu0QGnocPATKbAYVrN6Jgc44injtQN8CGggyrVk RCEe+2Y3X4xBv8FPl8hwLEqgqnx7nNw= Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.700.81\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Fix typos and formatting in function comments X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Thorsten Blum In-Reply-To: <717cb54f7ac6dd1f94a5c57c10a8cb377eb199bd.camel@intel.com> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 20:13:43 +0100 Cc: "jarkko@kernel.org" , "x86@kernel.org" , "bp@alien8.de" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" , "linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <71675CA4-D76B-4B81-B71B-8C2B79AAAC3C@linux.dev> References: <20251103090103.1415-2-thorsten.blum@linux.dev> <717cb54f7ac6dd1f94a5c57c10a8cb377eb199bd.camel@intel.com> To: "Huang, Kai" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 4. Nov 2025, at 00:47, Huang, Kai wrote: > It seems we don't have a consistent way of describing return values in = the > k-doc comments in sgx/main.c. E.g., >=20 > /** > * sgx_unmark_page_reclaimable() - Remove a page from the reclaim list >=20 > ... >=20 > * Return: > * 0 on success, > * -EBUSY if the page is in the process of being reclaimed > */ >=20 >=20 > /** > * sgx_alloc_epc_page() - Allocate an EPC page >=20 > ... >=20 > * Return: > * an EPC page, > * -errno on error > */ >=20 > Perhaps we should make them consistent in format. >=20 > But I think this can be done separately from fixing the typos. Maybe = you=20 > can split out the typo fixing as a separate patch, and have another = patch to > fixing the return value description? I used the style mostly found in main.c and ioctl.c - would that be the "correct" format for the others as well? Happy to submit a separate patch if it's worth it. Thanks, Thorsten