[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231205072912.2d79a1d5@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 07:29:12 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>,
Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
David Epping <david.epping@...singlinkelectronics.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@....com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
workflows@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3 3/3] net: phy: add support for PHY package
MMD read/write
On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 15:10:50 +0000 Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> I've raised this before in other subsystems, and it's suggested that
> it's better to have it in the .c file. I guess the reason is that it's
> more obvious that the function is documented when modifying it, so
> there's a higher probability that the kdoc will get updated when the
> function is altered.
Plus I think people using IDEs (i.e. not me) may use the "jump to
definition" functionality, to find the doc?
TBH I thought putting kdoc in the C source was documented in the coding
style, but I can't find any mention of it now.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists