Re: [Outreachy kernel] Re: [PATCH v4 ] staging: iio: cdc: ad7150: add comment to mutex

[Alison Schofield <amsfield22@gmail.com>]

Anchal,

I'm seeing that Greg doesn't have confidence in the comment added
to the mutex.  So, let's build his confidence.  That would mean
elaborating in the changelog a 'why' that shows that you did your
due diligence, studied where the lock is used and came up with
this comment.

Having said all that, in this case, and in another one you did or
attempted, a comment was already present, just not in the place
that checkpatch wants it.

So, a 'cheat' on this one would be to simply state that in the
changelog.  ie. Copied the comment from the structure header to the
structure body to appease checkpatch.  

BUT - rather than taking the cheat alone, follow up with a study of
the code so that you can make a meaningful comment in the changelog.
Now, if your study matches the comment - you know you understand it.
You do a few of those, then you move onto ones that don't have the
comment to compare.

The comment is important, because someone changing the code is going
to wonder if they need to take that lock and look at the comment.
If there is no comment, there going to go off and figure it out. If
there is a comment, they may rely on the comment.  We don't want to
lead them astray.

I think on this one, you did all the above and I probably led you
astray by suggesting a simplification of your changelog. 

If you want to try again, I'm game!

alisons