netdev - Re: [patch net-next 3/3] net: devlink: fix unlocked vs locked functions descriptions

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: <20220701093037.36ae3c67@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 1 Jul 2022 09:30:37 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, pabeni@...hat.com,
        edumazet@...gle.com, mlxsw@...dia.com, saeedm@...dia.com,
        moshe@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 3/3] net: devlink: fix unlocked vs locked
 functions descriptions

On Fri,  1 Jul 2022 11:59:26 +0200 Jiri Pirko wrote:

> + *	Register devlink port with provided port index. User can use
> + *	any indexing, even hw-related one. devlink_port structure
> + *	is convenient to be embedded inside user driver private structure.
> + *	Note that the caller should take care of zeroing the devlink_port
> + *	structure.

Should we also mention that the port type has to be set later?
I guess that may be beyond the scope.

> + */

> +/**
> + *	devlink_port_unregister - Unregister devlink port

devl_

> + *
> + *	@devlink_port: devlink port
> + */

I wonder if we should use this as an opportunity to start following 
the more modern kdoc format:

No tab indentation, and () after the function's name.

At least for the new kdoc we add.

>  void devl_port_unregister(struct devlink_port *devlink_port)
>  {
>  	lockdep_assert_held(&devlink_port->devlink->lock);