Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 07/27] net: add for_each iterators through neighbour lower link's private

From: Veaceslav Falico <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:36:18 +0200

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 02:26:43AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 02:46 +0200, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
>[...]
>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>> @@ -4537,6 +4537,72 @@ struct net_device *netdev_all_upper_get_next_dev_rcu(struct net_device *dev,
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(netdev_all_upper_get_next_dev_rcu);
>>
>> +/* netdev_lower_get_next_private - Get the next ->private from the
>> + *				   lower neighbour list
>[...]
>
>This is not correct kernel-doc syntax.  You must begin the comment like
>this:
>
>/**
> * function_name - summary on one physical line, no wrapping allowed

I've thought that netdev specifically requires that type of comments*. But
I don't have any strong opinion on that, so if needed - can change easily
in the next version.

Thanks a lot!

*Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt

Q: Someone said that the comment style and coding convention is different
    for the networking content.  Is this true?

A: Yes, in a largely trivial way.  Instead of this:

         /*
          * foobar blah blah blah
          * another line of text
          */

    it is requested that you make it look like this:

         /* foobar blah blah blah
          * another line of text
          */

>
>Ben.
>
>-- 
>Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
>Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
>They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
>