[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230501132058.GA1597602@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 15:20:58 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] sched: fix cid_lock kernel-doc warnings
On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 03:20:20PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 08:11:11PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> > Fix kernel-doc warnings for cid_lock and use_cid_lock.
> > These comments are not in kernel-doc format.
> >
> > kernel/sched/core.c:11496: warning: Cannot understand * @cid_lock: Guarantee forward-progress of cid allocation.
> > on line 11496 - I thought it was a doc line
> > kernel/sched/core.c:11505: warning: Cannot understand * @use_cid_lock: Select cid allocation behavior: lock-free vs spinlock.
> > on line 11505 - I thought it was a doc line
> >
> > Fixes: 223baf9d17f2 ("sched: Fix performance regression introduced by mm_cid")
> > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
>
> Blergh, so mostly I avoid kerneldoc like the plague; because then you
> get random people doing 'fixups' that end up making the actual comment
> unreadable garbage.
>
> Mostly my answer to any such patch is to simply remove the extra * and
> call it fixed.
>
> But now the thing presumes to know better? :-(
Bah, I should go sleep more.. this removes them. All good.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists