Re: [PATCH 1/6] genalloc: track beginning of allocations

[Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 01:17:01PM +0200, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/02/18 14:24, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 05:19:15AM +0200, Igor Stoppa wrote:
> [...]
> 
> >> +/**
> >> + * mem_to_units - convert references to memory into orders of allocation
> > 
> > Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst recommends to to include brackets
> > for function comments. I haven't noticed any difference in the resulting
> > html, so I'm not sure if the brackets are actually required.
> 
> This is what I see in the example from mailine docs:
> 
> /**
>  * foobar() - Brief description of foobar.
>  * @argument1: Description of parameter argument1 of foobar.
>  * @argument2: Description of parameter argument2 of foobar.
>  *
>  * Longer description of foobar.
>  *
>  * Return: Description of return value of foobar.
>  */
> int foobar(int argument1, char *argument2)
> 
> 
> What are you referring to?
 
I'm referring to "foobar() - brief description" vs "foobar - brief
description".

The generated html looks exactly the same in the browser, so I don't know
if the brackets are really required.

> [...]
> 
> >> + * @size: amount in bytes
> >> + * @order: power of 2 represented by each entry in the bitmap
> >> + *
> >> + * Returns the number of units representing the size.
> > 
> > Please s/Return/Return:/
> 
> :-( I thought I had fixed them all. thanks for spotting this.
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> + * Return: If two users alter the same bit, to one it will return
> >> + * remaining entries, to the other it will return 0.
> > 
> > And what if there are three or four concurrent users? ;-)
> > 
> > I believe that a more elaborate description about what happens with
> > concurrent attempts to alter the bitmap would be really helpful.
> 
> ok
> 
> --
> thanks, igor
> 

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.