[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YcLyzSI6qeLhypzG@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 10:41:33 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@...il.com>
Cc: realwakka@...il.com, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: pi433: add comment to rx_lock mutex definition
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 10:36:26PM +1300, Paulo Miguel Almeida wrote:
> Checkpatch reports: CHECK: struct mutex definition without comment.
> Fix this by documenting what rx_mutex struct is used for in pi433 driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paulo Miguel Almeida <paulo.miguel.almeida.rodenas@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> index 29bd37669059..aa0ecb3788c6 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ struct pi433_device {
> u32 rx_bytes_to_drop;
> u32 rx_bytes_dropped;
> unsigned int rx_position;
> + /* rx read and config operations can only be served one at the time */
What exactly does this mean? What is this protecting? This comment
doesn't seem to be explaining much :(
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists