Re: [PATCH 3/4] Intel PTI implementaiton of MIPI 1149.7.

[Randy Dunlap]

On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:05:00 -0700 J Freyensee wrote:

> On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 16:15 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> 
> A couple more comments below.
> 
> > On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:58:08 -0700 james_p_freyensee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


> > > + * @max_IDS: The max amount of available write IDs to use.
> > > + * @baseID:  The starting SW channel ID, based on the Intel
> > > + *           PTI arch.
> > > + *
> > > + * @return: pti_masterchannel struct containing master, channel ID address,
> > 
> > No '@' on "return".
> 
> Why no '@' on 'return' when just by doing a 'grep -Ri "@return" drivers/
> | wc -l' I count 369 examples of '@return' being used already in the
> kernel?  It looks like an acceptable format to me.

It's not.  See Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt.
'@' goes on function parameters (or struct members).
Not on return values.  Those other places should be fixed, but
it's just not a high priority thing to do.


> > > + * or 0 for error.
> > > + *
> > > + * Each bit in the arrays ia_app and ia_os correspond to a master and
> > > + * channel id. The bit is one if the id is taken and 0 if free. For
> > > + * every master there are 128 channel id's.
> > > + */
> > > +static struct pti_masterchannel *getID(u8 *IDarray, int max_IDS, int baseID)
> > > +{


> > > +/**
> > > + * pti_request_masterchannel() - Kernel API function used to allocate
> > > + *                                a master, channel ID address to write to
> > > + *                                PTI HW.
> > > + * @type: 0- request Application  master, channel aperture ID write address.
> > > + *        1- request OS master, channel aperture ID write address.
> > > + *        2- request Modem master, channel aperture ID write
> > > + *           address.
> > > + *        Other values, error.
> > > + * @return: pti_masterchannel struct or 0 for error.
> > 
> > No '@' on "return".
> 
> Same reason here.

Same answer here.



> > > + *
> > > + * @return int : Success = 0, otherwise fail.
> > 
> > No '@' on "return".
> 
> Same explanation as above.

Same reply also.



---
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/