Re: [RFC PATCH v8 03/10] dpll: core: Add DPLL framework base functions

[Jiri Pirko]

Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 08:55:35PM CEST, arkadiusz.kubalewski@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2023 7:38 PM
>>
>>Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 02:18:46PM CEST, arkadiusz.kubalewski@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>>DPLL framework is used to represent and configure DPLL devices
>>>in systems. Each device that has DPLL and can configure inputs
>>>and outputs can use this framework.
>>>
>>>Implement core framework functions for further interactions
>>>with device drivers implementing dpll subsystem, as well as for
>>>interactions of DPLL netlink framework part with the subsystem
>>>itself.
>>>
>>>Co-developed-by: Milena Olech <milena.olech@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Signed-off-by: Milena Olech <milena.olech@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Co-developed-by: Michal Michalik <michal.michalik@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Signed-off-by: Michal Michalik <michal.michalik@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Signed-off-by: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Co-developed-by: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>Signed-off-by: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>---
>>> drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 953 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/dpll/dpll_core.h | 104 +++++
>>
>>Overall, looks very good! I pinpointed couple of nits below, nothing big.
>>General question: Why do you put documentation comment to every static
>>function? Does not make any sense to me. Even for non-exported functions
>>I think it is overkill. Most of them (if not all) give the reader no
>>additional information and only make the code a bit harder to read.
>>Care to drop them?
>>
>
>I forgot to respond here.. I would rather leave it, but if the others think
>the same way, we could remove them.

Could you explain what is the benefit of leaving them? What are they
good for. From what I see, they are obvious and only add blank LOC.