From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel•org>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix•de>
Cc: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux•org.uk>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat•com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft•net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google•com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn•ch>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail•com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn•net>,
kernel@pengutronix•de, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org,
netdev@vger•kernel.org, Simon Horman <horms@kernel•org>,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@bootlin•com>,
linux-doc@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: phy: Move callback comments from struct to kernel-doc section
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 07:03:11 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241217070311.1c867d32@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z2EO45xuUkzlw-Uy@pengutronix.de>
On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 06:40:51 +0100 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > Please rephrase, I do not understand.
> > >
> > > Should I resend this patch with corrected "Return:" description, or
> > > continue with inlined comments withing the struct and drop this patch?
> >
> > I'm not talking about Returns, I'm talking about the core idea of
> > the patch. The duplicate definitions seem odd, can we teach kernel-doc
> > to understand function args instead? Most obvious format which comes
> > to mind:
> >
> > * ...
> > * @config_init - Initialize the PHY, including after a reset.
> > * @config_init.phydev: The PHY device to initialize.
> > *
> > * Returns: 0 on success or a negative error code on failure.
> > * ...
>
> It will be too many side quests to me for now. I can streamline comments
> if there is agreement how it should look like. But fixing kdoc - I would leave
> it to the experts.
>
> What do you prefer, proceed with stats patch without fixing comments or
> fix comment without fixing kdoc?
The former. And you're using the word "fix" very loosely here, IMHO.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-17 15:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-06 11:39 [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: phy: Move callback comments from struct to kernel-doc section Oleksij Rempel
2024-12-06 12:14 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-12-07 20:38 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-12-10 11:56 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-12-10 14:02 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-12-10 14:37 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-12-16 12:20 ` Oleksij Rempel
2024-12-17 1:53 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-12-17 5:40 ` Oleksij Rempel
2024-12-17 15:03 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2025-01-02 16:56 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2025-01-02 18:01 ` Jonathan Corbet
2025-01-02 18:28 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2024-12-10 12:03 ` Mateusz Polchlopek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20241217070311.1c867d32@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn$(echo .)ch \
--cc=corbet@lwn$(echo .)net \
--cc=davem@davemloft$(echo .)net \
--cc=edumazet@google$(echo .)com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=horms@kernel$(echo .)org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix$(echo .)de \
--cc=linux-doc@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux$(echo .)org.uk \
--cc=maxime.chevallier@bootlin$(echo .)com \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix$(echo .)de \
--cc=pabeni@redhat$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox