Re: [PATCH 01/19] drm/i915/i915_scatterlist: Fix kerneldoc formatting issue - missing '@'

[Jani Nikula]

On Wed, 05 Apr 2023, Lee Jones <lee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Apr 2023, Jani Nikula wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 03 Apr 2023, Lee Jones <lee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 03 Apr 2023, Jani Nikula wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 31 Mar 2023, Lee Jones <lee@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> > Fixes the following W=1 kernel build warning(s):
>> >> >
>> >> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scatterlist.c:62: warning: Function parameter or member 'size' not described in 'i915_refct_sgt_init'
>> >> >
>> >> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > Cc: David Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@xxxxxxxx>
>> >> > Cc: intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > Cc: dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for the patches!
>> >>
>> >> Applied all but one of the drm/i915 patches to drm-intel-next or
>> >> drm-intel-gt-next depending on the area. There were a couple of issues
>> >> that I fixed while applying. There was a conflict with patch 5/19
>> >> against drm-intel-gt-next so I left that one out.
>> >
>> > Thanks Jani.  I'll rebase and see what's left.
>>
>> We also took notice and aim to track this more aggressively [1].
>
> Thanks.
>
> I did clean-up all of the GPU warnings already a couple of years ago,
> but they seem to have crept back over time.  It would be great if we
> could put some extra checks in place to prevent them in the future.

We are pretty zealous about warnings in general in i915. We have a bunch
of extra warnings in our local Makefile and use -Werror in
development. Inspired by this series, we added kernel-doc check to the
build, and hope to add kernel-doc -Werror too once we're done.

> My aim, albeit ambitious, is to clean-up all of the W=1 warnings in the
> kernel, then have them promoted to W=0, so they warn more loudly during
> development, thus keeping them from reappearing.

I wish it was easier to do the equivalent of W=1 on a driver or Makefile
basis. I like to keep i915 clean, but I don't like to use W=1 because
there are just so many warnings currently.

The other alternative is fixing and moving extra warnings from W=1 to
W=0 one by one.


BR,
Jani.


-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center