From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030259AbWFAUDQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:03:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030260AbWFAUDQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:03:16 -0400 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.184]:48443 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030259AbWFAUDP (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Jun 2006 16:03:15 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:x-accept-language:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=pNCqbdmA+p9euH/KVw91fmufeUEzU6/1+WIbWu2qF0vVI5BklOBu48iDhNe8RAXpSDPFZjTbKifM1n9Op7OOVDS47KcnjgsEBBkbRrKNZhPw8a8ZBdk2RnzmxzOdCqBGXVfa3OVDOSg+Jxtt0Px3MTEGraJ9fW92ujm5i1L6I9c= Message-ID: <447F47FD.2050705@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 23:03:09 +0300 From: Anssi Hannula User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6-7.5.20060mdk (X11/20050322) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Randy.Dunlap" CC: dtor_core@ameritech.net, linux-joystick@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org Subject: Re: input: fix comments and blank lines in new ff code References: <20060530105705.157014000@gmail.com> <20060530110131.136225000@gmail.com> <20060530222122.069da389.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <447F3AE4.6010206@gmail.com> <20060601125256.de2897f4.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <20060601125256.de2897f4.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Randy.Dunlap wrote: > On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 22:07:16 +0300 Anssi Hannula wrote: > > >>Fix comments so that they conform to kernel-doc and add/remove some >>blank lines. >> >>Signed-off-by: Anssi Hannula > > > (attachments make review/comments more trying, so this is an > abbreviated reply) Sorry, I'll try to use some other client when I send the fixed patch. > /** > - * Lock the mutex and check the device has not been deleted > + * input_ff_safe_lock - lock the mutex and check for the ff_device struct > + * > + * Returns 0 if device still present, 1 otherwise. > */ > static inline int input_ff_safe_lock(struct input_dev *dev) > { > > Functions that are commented with kernel-doc need all of the parameters > documented also, like: > > * @dev: the input_dev (or better description) > > There were a few places where you had these and deleted them. :( > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > (repeat for several functions...) > Ah, so if the comment is kernel-doc all parameters have to be always documented... I guess I can just remove the double ** for static functions, as I'm not sure it is necessary to document all the obvious parameters of those. Or what do you think? -- Anssi Hannula