[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190313005623.GC31710@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 17:56:23 -0700
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>,
Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
x86 <x86@...nel.org>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/18] x86/split_lock: Enumerate #AC for split lock by
MSR IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 04:52:37PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 3/12/19 4:00 PM, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > +/**
> > + * set_cpu_core_cap_bits - enumerate features supported in IA32_CORE_CAPABILITY
> > + * @c: pointer to cpuinfo_x86
> > + *
> > + * Return: void
> > + */
> > +void __init cpu_set_core_cap_bits(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>
> I think this is kerneldoc overkill. It just wastes space and adds no
> value here.
OK. I will not add the function in kerneldoc.
Thanks.
-Fenghua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists