linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] staging: rtl8723bs: fix block comment style

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: <2026011200-rudder-amino-445a@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 10:32:21 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Nayana Mariyappa <nayana.mariyappa@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] staging: rtl8723bs: fix block comment style

On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 04:34:26AM +0000, Nayana Mariyappa wrote:
> Fixed multi-line block comments in osdep_service.c to follow kernel
> coding style.
> No functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nayana Mariyappa <nayana.mariyappa@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/os_dep/osdep_service.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/os_dep/osdep_service.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/os_dep/osdep_service.c
> index a00f9f0c85c5..8f6dd3560303 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/os_dep/osdep_service.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/os_dep/osdep_service.c
> @@ -6,10 +6,10 @@
>   ******************************************************************************/
>  #include <drv_types.h>
>  
> -/*
> -* Translate the OS dependent @param error_code to OS independent RTW_STATUS_CODE
> -* @return: one of RTW_STATUS_CODE
> -*/
> +/**

Nit, this shouldn't be /**, but rather /* as before, as this is not a
valid kernel doc comment.

If you want to turn it into a kernel-doc statement, like I think
checkpatch is warning you about, then please do so, with the full
function name and arguments documented.  But I really doubt this is
needed at all, but rather this can just be a one line comment instead.

thanks,

greg k-h