linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] list_lru: expand list_lru_add() docs with info about sublists

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: <CAH5fLgg00x1SaV-nmPtvRw_26sZbQxW3B0UWSr1suAmhybxc_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2024 09:58:27 +0100
From: Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, 
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Nhat Pham <nphamcs@...il.com>, 
	Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>, Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>, 
	Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, 
	Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>, linux-mm@...ck.org, cgroups@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] list_lru: expand list_lru_add() docs with info about sublists

On Fri, Nov 29, 2024 at 12:05 AM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:12:11PM +0000, Alice Ryhl wrote:
> > - * Return: true if the list was updated, false otherwise
> > + * Return value: true if the item was added, false otherwise
>
> This is an incorrect change.  The section is always called 'Return', not
> 'Return value'; see Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst.  And I
> think it was fine to say "list was updated" rather than "item was
> added".  They're basically synonyms.
>
> > - * Return value: true if the list was updated, false otherwise
> > + * Return value: true if the item was added, false otherwise
>
> Ditto (and other similar changes)

Oh I had not noticed the "Return"/"Return value" change. It must be a
copy-paste artifact from list_lru_del_obj() which already uses "Return
value". Would you like me to change that one to 'Return'?

As for the other rewording, I thought it was slightly more
unambiguous, but don't feel strongly about it.

Alice