Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/debugfs: add descriptions to struct parameters

["Maíra Canal" <mcanal@igalia.com>]

On 1/6/23 17:19, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 04:30:39PM -0300, Maíra Canal wrote:
>> The structs drm_debugfs_info and drm_debugfs_entry don't have
>> descriptions for their parameters, which is causing the following warnings:
>>
>> include/drm/drm_debugfs.h:93: warning: Function parameter or member
>> 'name' not described in 'drm_debugfs_info'
>> include/drm/drm_debugfs.h:93: warning: Function parameter or member
>> 'show' not described in 'drm_debugfs_info'
>> include/drm/drm_debugfs.h:93: warning: Function parameter or member
>> 'driver_features' not described in 'drm_debugfs_info'
>> include/drm/drm_debugfs.h:93: warning: Function parameter or member
>> 'data' not described in 'drm_debugfs_info'
>> include/drm/drm_debugfs.h:105: warning: Function parameter or member
>> 'dev' not described in 'drm_debugfs_entry'
>> include/drm/drm_debugfs.h:105: warning: Function parameter or member
>> 'file' not described in 'drm_debugfs_entry'
>> include/drm/drm_debugfs.h:105: warning: Function parameter or member
>> 'list' not described in 'drm_debugfs_entry'
>>
>> Therefore, fix the warnings by adding descriptions to all struct
>> parameters.
>>
>> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
>> Signed-off-by: Maíra Canal <mcanal@igalia.com>
>> ---
>>   include/drm/drm_debugfs.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/drm/drm_debugfs.h b/include/drm/drm_debugfs.h
>> index 53b7297260a5..7616f457ce70 100644
>> --- a/include/drm/drm_debugfs.h
>> +++ b/include/drm/drm_debugfs.h
>> @@ -86,9 +86,22 @@ struct drm_info_node {
>>    * core.
>>    */
>>   struct drm_debugfs_info {
>> +	/** @name: File name */
>>   	const char *name;
>> +
>> +	/**
>> +	 * @show:
>> +	 *
>> +	 * Show callback. &seq_file->private will be set to the &struct
>> +	 * drm_debugfs_entry corresponding to the instance of this info
>> +	 * on a given &struct drm_device.
> 
> So this is a bit late, but why don't we pass that drm_debugfs_entry as an
> explicit parameter? Or maybe just the struct drm_device, because that and
> the void *data is really all there is to pass along. Would give us more
> type-safety, which really is the main reason for having drm-specific
> debugfs functions.

It seems like a better idea to pass the drm_debugfs_entry as an explicit
parameter. I can work on it, but I guess it is a better idea to finish
the conversion of all drm_debugfs_create_files() to drm_debugfs_add_files()
and then perform the change in the show() signature.

Best Regards,
- Maíra Canal

> 
> Either way, on the series: Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> 
>> +	 */
>>   	int (*show)(struct seq_file*, void*);
>> +
>> +	/** @driver_features: Required driver features for this entry. */
>>   	u32 driver_features;
>> +
>> +	/** @data: Driver-private data, should not be device-specific. */
>>   	void *data;
>>   };
>>   
>> @@ -99,8 +112,13 @@ struct drm_debugfs_info {
>>    * drm_debugfs_info on a &struct drm_device.
>>    */
>>   struct drm_debugfs_entry {
>> +	/** @dev: &struct drm_device for this node. */
>>   	struct drm_device *dev;
>> +
>> +	/** @file: Template for this node. */
>>   	struct drm_debugfs_info file;
>> +
>> +	/** @list: Linked list of all device nodes. */
>>   	struct list_head list;
>>   };
>>   
>> -- 
>> 2.39.0
>>
>