[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200812041157.15355.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 11:57:14 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Yet more ARM breakage in linux-next
On Thursday 04 December 2008 10:07:44 Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Rusty Russell wrote:
> > (Yes, classic useless kerneldoc documentation doesn't actually *say*
> > this clearly).
>
> oh fud. That's not a fault of kernel-doc, just of whoever wrote it.
> It's only as good as someone makes it.
Sorry that this came out wrong. kernel-doc provides structure, but it can't
provide content. And authors seem unable to think from the POV of someone
*using* the API.
With some work, I tracked it back to Stephen Hemminger for this comment in
12d9c8420b9daa1da3d9e090640fb24bcd0deba2. It's since been fixed and moved,
but it's still:
* __fls: find last set bit in word
* @word: The word to search
*
* Undefined if no set bit exists, so code should check against 0 first.
Which would be *fine* if fls() didn't have such confusing bit numbering and
the exact same one-line description.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists