Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] cpumask: Fix kernel-doc formatting errors in cpumask.h

[Viresh Kumar]

Hi Yury / Akira / Mauro,

On 07-03-25, 12:05, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 01:04:51PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >  /**
> > - * cpumask_next_and - get the next cpu in *src1p & *src2p
> > + * cpumask_next_and - get the next cpu in *@src1p & *@src2p
> >   * @n: the cpu prior to the place to search (i.e. return will be > @n)
> >   * @src1p: the first cpumask pointer
> >   * @src2p: the second cpumask pointer
> 
> So the question: if some word in this particular comment block is
> prefixed with @ symbol, can we teach kernel-doc to consider every
> occurrence of this word as a variable?
> 
> Why I'm asking: before the "*src1p & *src2p" was a line of C code.
> And because we are all C programmers here, it's really simple to ident
> it and decode. After it looks like something weird, and I think many
> of us will just mentally skip it.
> 
> I like kernel-docs and everything, but again, kernel sources should
> stay readable, and particularly comments should stay human-readable.

I was looking to get a public links to cpumask APIs, like:

https://docs.kernel.org/core-api/kernel-api.html#bitmap-operations

which I can use from the (WIP) Rust cpumask documentation.

Can you suggest how do I move ahead with this ?

- Let the warnings be there and keep the comment as "... cpu in *src1p & *stc2p" ?

- Something like what Mauro suggested: "... cpu in @src1p and @stc2p" ? 

- Something else ?

-- 
viresh