linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] ipmi: kcs_bmc: Add subsystem kerneldoc

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: <25b2f045e39fc40862c88d4af7081e4bbc0e3c92.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Date:   Mon, 06 Nov 2023 10:35:05 +1030
From:   Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc:     minyard@....org, openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aladyshev22@...il.com,
        jk@...econstruct.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] ipmi: kcs_bmc: Add subsystem kerneldoc

On Fri, 2023-11-03 at 15:12 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri,  3 Nov 2023 16:45:22 +1030
> Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > Provide kerneldoc describing the relationships between and the
> > behaviours of the structures and functions of the KCS subsystem.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
> Seems reasonable but I've only a superficial idea of how this all fits
> together so no tag from me.

Thanks for the reviews so far!

> 
> There is the fun question of whether function documentation should be
> next to the implementation or in the header.  As long as it's
> consistent in a given subsystem I don't personally thing it matters
> that much.

Happy to put it where people prefer. I like the consistency of having
it all in the one spot, but I appreciate the idea that it might be
easier to maintain alongside the implementation.

Andrew