Re: [PATCH v2] seqlock: <linux/seqlock.h>: fix multiple kernel-doc warnings

[peterz]

On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 05:02:00PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:

> --- lnx-59-rc1.orig/include/linux/seqlock.h
> +++ lnx-59-rc1/include/linux/seqlock.h

> @@ -173,7 +173,6 @@ seqcount_##lockname##_init(seqcount_##lo
>  	seqcount_init(&s->seqcount);					\
>  	__SEQ_LOCK(s->lock = lock);					\
>  }									\
> -									\
>  static __always_inline seqcount_t *					\
>  __seqcount_##lockname##_ptr(seqcount_##lockname##_t *s)			\
>  {									\

I think I'd rather like that empty line there..

> @@ -218,9 +217,9 @@ SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE(struct mutex,		mutex,
>  SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE(struct ww_mutex,	ww_mutex,	true,	&s->lock->base)
>  
>  /**
> - * SEQCNT_LOCKNAME_ZERO - static initializer for seqcount_LOCKNAME_t
> - * @name:	Name of the seqcount_LOCKNAME_t instance
> - * @lock:	Pointer to the associated LOCKTYPE
> + * SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO - static initializer for seqcount_LOCKNAME_t
> + * @seq_name:	Name of the seqcount_LOCKNAME_t instance
> + * @assoc_lock:	Pointer to the associated LOCKTYPE
>   */
>  
>  #define SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO(seq_name, assoc_lock) {			\

And this hunk seems wrong, SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO() is not the intended
API, SEQCNT_*_ZERO() are.


I've edited the patch like below, is that OK with you?

---
Subject: seqlock: Fix multiple kernel-doc warnings
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2020 17:02:00 -0700

From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Fix kernel-doc warnings in <linux/seqlock.h>.

../include/linux/seqlock.h:152: warning: Incorrect use of kernel-doc format:  * seqcount_LOCKNAME_init() - runtime initializer for seqcount_LOCKNAME_t
../include/linux/seqlock.h:164: warning: Incorrect use of kernel-doc format:  * SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE() - Instantiate seqcount_LOCKNAME_t and helpers
../include/linux/seqlock.h:229: warning: Function parameter or member 'seq_name' not described in 'SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO'
../include/linux/seqlock.h:229: warning: Function parameter or member 'assoc_lock' not described in 'SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO'
../include/linux/seqlock.h:229: warning: Excess function parameter 'name' description in 'SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO'
../include/linux/seqlock.h:229: warning: Excess function parameter 'lock' description in 'SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO'
../include/linux/seqlock.h:695: warning: duplicate section name 'NOTE'

Demote kernel-doc notation for the macros "seqcount_LOCKNAME_init()" and
"SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE()"; scripts/kernel-doc does not handle them correctly.

Rename function parameters in SEQCNT_LOCKNAME_ZERO() documentation
to match the macro's argument names. Change the macro name in the
documentation to SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE_ZERO() to match the macro's name.

For raw_write_seqcount_latch(), rename the second NOTE: to NOTE2:
to prevent a kernel-doc warning. However, the generated output is not
quite as nice as it could be for this.

Fix a typo: s/LOCKTYPR/LOCKTYPE/

Fixes: 0efc94c5d15c ("seqcount: Compress SEQCNT_LOCKNAME_ZERO()")
Fixes: e4e9ab3f9f91 ("seqlock: Fold seqcount_LOCKNAME_init() definition")
Fixes: a8772dccb2ec ("seqlock: Fold seqcount_LOCKNAME_t definition")
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200817000200.20993-1-rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
v2: do not move the definition of seqcount_LOCKNAME_init().
Fix build errors reported by kernel test robot.
Actually build a kernel with these changes.

 include/linux/seqlock.h |    8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

--- a/include/linux/seqlock.h
+++ b/include/linux/seqlock.h
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ static inline void seqcount_lockdep_read
 #endif
 
 /**
- * typedef seqcount_LOCKNAME_t - sequence counter with LOCKTYPR associated
+ * typedef seqcount_LOCKNAME_t - sequence counter with LOCKTYPE associated
  * @seqcount:	The real sequence counter
  * @lock:	Pointer to the associated spinlock
  *
@@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ static inline void seqcount_lockdep_read
  * that the write side critical section is properly serialized.
  */
 
-/**
+/*
  * seqcount_LOCKNAME_init() - runtime initializer for seqcount_LOCKNAME_t
  * @s:		Pointer to the seqcount_LOCKNAME_t instance
  * @lock:	Pointer to the associated LOCKTYPE
@@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE(rwlock_t,		rwlock,		fa
 SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE(struct mutex,		mutex,		true,	s->lock)
 SEQCOUNT_LOCKTYPE(struct ww_mutex,	ww_mutex,	true,	&s->lock->base)
 
-/**
+/*
  * SEQCNT_LOCKNAME_ZERO - static initializer for seqcount_LOCKNAME_t
  * @name:	Name of the seqcount_LOCKNAME_t instance
  * @lock:	Pointer to the associated LOCKTYPE
@@ -688,7 +688,7 @@ static inline int raw_read_seqcount_t_la
  *	to miss an entire modification sequence, once it resumes it might
  *	observe the new entry.
  *
- * NOTE:
+ * NOTE2:
  *
  *	When data is a dynamic data structure; one should use regular RCU
  *	patterns to manage the lifetimes of the objects within.