| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <52388CC4.7040101@infradead.org> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:09:24 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fix fatal kernel-doc error On 09/17/13 03:32, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 06:08:02PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> >> >> Fix fatal kernel-doc error in <linux/regulator/driver.h>: >> >> Error(include/linux/regulator/driver.h:52): cannot understand prototype: 'struct regulator_linear_range ' > > Applied with the first line redone, but this seems like really terrible > quality of implementation for the kernel-doc stuff - it shouldn't > explode over something readily copable with like this. Should we also > not pick this sort of thing up in -next? /** means kernel-doc syntax and it was not in proper kernel-doc format, but maybe it could just be a Warning instead of a fatal Error. Ideally we should pick it up in -next, of course, but I doubt that anyone is running kernel-doc on linux-next. I used to do that, but there are too many errors/warnings. I suppose that I could just concentrate on (fatal) Errors in linux-next and ignore the Warnings. -- ~Randy -- 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