Re: [RFC PATCH] fscache, 9p, afs, cifs, nfs: Deal with some warnings from W=1

[David Howells]

Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_addr.c
> > @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static const struct netfs_read_request_ops v9fs_req_ops = {
> >  
> >  /**
> >   * v9fs_vfs_readpage - read an entire page in from 9P
> > - * @filp: file being read
> > + * @file: file being read
> >   * @page: structure to page
> >   *
> >   */
> 
> This is an example of a weird pattern in filesystems.  Several of
> them have kernel-doc for the implementation of various ->ops methods.
> I don't necessarily believe we should delete the comments (although is
> there any useful information in the above?), but I don't see the point
> in the comment being kernel-doc.

Yeah - I would prefer to do that.  Only kdoc it if it's inter-(sub-)driver API
- and if it is, it must have a namespacing prefix so that it is obvious in
amongst a kernel-wide general index.

David