[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZyOu-7MeTYGa7tf9@PC2K9PVX.TheFacebook.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 12:23:23 -0400
From: Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, rrichter@....com, Terry.Bowman@....com,
dave.jiang@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com,
alison.schofield@...el.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com, rafael@...nel.org,
lenb@...nel.org, david@...hat.com, osalvador@...e.de,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] memory: implement
memory_block_advise/probe_max_size
On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 04:31:03PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 04:20:39PM -0400, Gregory Price wrote:
> > + * Return: 0 on success
> > + * -EINVAL if size is 0 or not pow2 aligned
> > + * -EBUSY if value has already been probed
> > + */
> > +static size_t memory_block_advised_sz;
> > +static bool memory_block_advised_size_queried;
>
> kernel-doc will be unhappy about variable declarations between the doc
> block and the function it describes
>
Yup, that was the warning I was waiting to clear KLP.
Learning new things n.n;; - new version shortly
~Gregory
Powered by blists - more mailing lists