From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227NM+260CDneaj+LmcBlOodp5phFomnMea+vx3O3qVG7MS3Duasuu09Ns0trJ06ICQY8TsP ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1518434259; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=zQmaln//r2njzO0NtJ6GxNGMIz27irpW/q/kSFjghFNbsJgaddeAy2F40gXRhpuMQB C03sJx6Bewrc8rJQs7SA7SaT5PwvjIcrohx+1g6EZe5R4ChUcfgyU7LkqKZV/RCkk5r0 3ba3cvUIhcfYXi6SI7xeX2ABo+qIdVOP9fezlu+gohK1pQO27u9cDECIvOmemJhhWqZS 0r1WnI4GL7qj6UUu7qXvKB1NOmSCbC5GKcJttMshpkDRwXp+neGRCnDGtou9EJ66V3jY LmaQA2NFb3bGxmqKAX5/fuOCSkQwT/q2xN9r4uGaaSwYZ9HvyxEnix5WJ+GjNKWCn7S4 a8cQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version :user-agent:date:message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject :delivered-to:list-id:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:list-help :list-post:precedence:mailing-list:arc-authentication-results; bh=KeRlfLVfFlxEerJiwWYxSa85M3TKAOfKPNCsh/3rXKo=; b=XLbRLq5MOudo7jdRiAJHE77rFYsHTd8t1u8vRlMW1UvM3bYmaFJk3ENBQF9wt/Ri9U 9BIx52oPlwWp7LS80qMW1ocdPVKTHClCWZWr7XLy/oETrhDZCaz6HSRmguOvtWFfHSfy 1nUPa/zkL02zzcjz9/PgFysDhMba+5ndhd6zHvCFhDuianI2FgZpcP3St8lliegcwG2h eVich8m/PLZ/a182N/2pIcG+Ix7bojVnEZsV1RFdEnui/5qQhNqEdvcJZlYmGZsjjOLb +C1bnphNVSSwq4Q70qfCqs5OnWfwQ3rX8p1XMFl3E4onwpqRBRyXStAROeNvNoguM45T fxZA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of kernel-hardening-return-11713-gregkh=linuxfoundation.org@lists.openwall.com designates 195.42.179.200 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kernel-hardening-return-11713-gregkh=linuxfoundation.org@lists.openwall.com Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of kernel-hardening-return-11713-gregkh=linuxfoundation.org@lists.openwall.com designates 195.42.179.200 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kernel-hardening-return-11713-gregkh=linuxfoundation.org@lists.openwall.com Mailing-List: contact kernel-hardening-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] genalloc: track beginning of allocations To: Mike Rapoport CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20180211031920.3424-1-igor.stoppa@huawei.com> <20180211031920.3424-2-igor.stoppa@huawei.com> <20180211122444.GB13931@rapoport-lnx> From: Igor Stoppa Message-ID: Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:17:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180211122444.GB13931@rapoport-lnx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.122.225.51] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-getmail-retrieved-from-mailbox: INBOX X-GMAIL-THRID: =?utf-8?q?1592073112440630013?= X-GMAIL-MSGID: =?utf-8?q?1592193722284705318?= X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/02/18 14:24, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 05:19:15AM +0200, Igor Stoppa wrote: [...] >> +/** >> + * mem_to_units - convert references to memory into orders of allocation > > Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst recommends to to include brackets > for function comments. I haven't noticed any difference in the resulting > html, so I'm not sure if the brackets are actually required. This is what I see in the example from mailine docs: /** * foobar() - Brief description of foobar. * @argument1: Description of parameter argument1 of foobar. * @argument2: Description of parameter argument2 of foobar. * * Longer description of foobar. * * Return: Description of return value of foobar. */ int foobar(int argument1, char *argument2) What are you referring to? [...] >> + * @size: amount in bytes >> + * @order: power of 2 represented by each entry in the bitmap >> + * >> + * Returns the number of units representing the size. > > Please s/Return/Return:/ :-( I thought I had fixed them all. thanks for spotting this. [...] >> + * Return: If two users alter the same bit, to one it will return >> + * remaining entries, to the other it will return 0. > > And what if there are three or four concurrent users? ;-) > > I believe that a more elaborate description about what happens with > concurrent attempts to alter the bitmap would be really helpful. ok -- thanks, igor