linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/2] cpusets: restructure the function update_cpumask() and update

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 30 May 2008 10:46:58 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc:	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, miaox@...fujitsu.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	menage@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/2] cpusets: restructure the function
 update_cpumask() and update_nodemask()

> I have never seen or heard of a document using the "/**" kernel-doc
> entries of kernel/cpuset.c, and I have no idea who actually has (in
> the past or present, not just hypothetically) read such or why.

People wanting to generate things like function lists.

> being a stubborn retard, I continue to prefer that file static routines
> in kernel/cpuset.c not have "/**" kernel-doc markers on their comments,
> and I would still welcome a patch from Miao removing the ones already
> there.

And I'll join that by stubbonly NAKing such an approach. We want
consistent clear formats for documentation extraction. Simply getting
people to use the kerneldoc format materially improves the documentation
quality, so please don't set bad examples ;)

Alan

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/