linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: fix all kernel-doc warnings

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]

Message-ID: <20211217010041.GA13109@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Dec 2021 17:00:41 -0800
From:   Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: fix all kernel-doc warnings

On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 04:08:59PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Quieten all kernel-doc warnings in kernel/sched/fair.c:
> 
> kernel/sched/fair.c:3663: warning: No description found for return value of 'update_cfs_rq_load_avg'
> kernel/sched/fair.c:8601: warning: No description found for return value of 'asym_smt_can_pull_tasks'
> kernel/sched/fair.c:8673: warning: Function parameter or member 'sds' not described in 'update_sg_lb_stats'
> kernel/sched/fair.c:9483: warning: contents before sections
> 
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Cc: Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
> Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
> ---
>  kernel/sched/fair.c |    8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> --- next-2021-1210.orig/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ next-2021-1210/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -3653,7 +3653,7 @@ static inline void add_tg_cfs_propagate(
>   *
>   * cfs_rq->avg is used for task_h_load() and update_cfs_share() for example.
>   *
> - * Returns true if the load decayed or we removed load.
> + * Return: true if the load decayed or we removed load.
>   *
>   * Since both these conditions indicate a changed cfs_rq->avg.load we should
>   * call update_tg_load_avg() when this function returns true.
> @@ -8594,6 +8594,8 @@ group_type group_classify(unsigned int i
>   *
>   * If @sg does not have SMT siblings, only pull tasks if all of the SMT siblings
>   * of @dst_cpu are idle and @sg has lower priority.
> + *
> + * Return: true if the load-balancing CPU can pull tasks, false otherwise.

Can we say "Return: true if @dst_cpu can pull tasks, false otherwise"?
The load-balancing CPU is not always the same as dst_cpu.

Thanks and BR,
Ricardo