[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3c5ca52f-8144-4214-a6e3-35d9139fa6a7@infradead.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2024 10:11:09 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>, arnd@...db.de, mpe@...erman.id.au,
npiggin@...il.com, christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, aneesh.kumar@...nel.org,
naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com
Cc: linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 3/3] powerpc/rtas: Add kernel-doc comments to
smp_startup_cpu()
On 4/6/24 11:39 PM, Yang Li wrote:
> This commit adds kernel-doc style comments with complete parameter
> descriptions for the function smp_startup_cpu().
>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/smp.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/smp.c
> index 30394c6f8894..bdb7adde798d 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/smp.c
> @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ static cpumask_t of_spin_map;
> /**
> * smp_startup_cpu() - start the given cpu
> *
> + * @lcpu: Logical CPU ID of the CPU to be started.
Does this work with the blank line between the function and parameter?
(i.e., no kernel-doc warnings?)
Usually it's done without the extra line.
Otherwise the additional line for @lcpu: looks good to me.
Thanks.
> + *
> * At boot time, there is nothing to do for primary threads which were
> * started from Open Firmware. For anything else, call RTAS with the
> * appropriate start location.
--
#Randy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists