* [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features()
@ 2023-09-13 16:56 Oliver Upton
2023-09-13 17:27 ` Jing Zhang
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Oliver Upton @ 2023-09-13 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kvmarm
Cc: kvm, Marc Zyngier, James Morse, Suzuki K Poulose, Zenghui Yu,
Jing Zhang, Oliver Upton
A double-asterisk opening mark to the comment (i.e. '/**') indicates a
comment block is in the kerneldoc format. There's automation in place to
validate that kerneldoc blocks actually adhere to the formatting rules.
The function comment for arm64_check_features() isn't kerneldoc; use a
'regular' comment to silence automation warnings.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202309112251.e25LqfcK-lkp@intel.com/
Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
---
arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
index e92ec810d449..818a52e257ed 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
@@ -1228,7 +1228,7 @@ static s64 kvm_arm64_ftr_safe_value(u32 id, const struct arm64_ftr_bits *ftrp,
return arm64_ftr_safe_value(&kvm_ftr, new, cur);
}
-/**
+/*
* arm64_check_features() - Check if a feature register value constitutes
* a subset of features indicated by the idreg's KVM sanitised limit.
*
base-commit: 0bb80ecc33a8fb5a682236443c1e740d5c917d1d
--
2.42.0.459.ge4e396fd5e-goog
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features()
2023-09-13 16:56 [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features() Oliver Upton
@ 2023-09-13 17:27 ` Jing Zhang
2023-09-18 12:56 ` Zenghui Yu
2023-09-18 17:14 ` Oliver Upton
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jing Zhang @ 2023-09-13 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oliver Upton
Cc: kvmarm, kvm, Marc Zyngier, James Morse, Suzuki K Poulose,
Zenghui Yu
Hi Oliver,
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 9:56 AM Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> A double-asterisk opening mark to the comment (i.e. '/**') indicates a
> comment block is in the kerneldoc format. There's automation in place to
> validate that kerneldoc blocks actually adhere to the formatting rules.
>
> The function comment for arm64_check_features() isn't kerneldoc; use a
> 'regular' comment to silence automation warnings.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202309112251.e25LqfcK-lkp@intel.com/
> Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index e92ec810d449..818a52e257ed 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1228,7 +1228,7 @@ static s64 kvm_arm64_ftr_safe_value(u32 id, const struct arm64_ftr_bits *ftrp,
> return arm64_ftr_safe_value(&kvm_ftr, new, cur);
> }
>
> -/**
> +/*
Thanks for the fix.
Jing
> * arm64_check_features() - Check if a feature register value constitutes
> * a subset of features indicated by the idreg's KVM sanitised limit.
> *
>
> base-commit: 0bb80ecc33a8fb5a682236443c1e740d5c917d1d
> --
> 2.42.0.459.ge4e396fd5e-goog
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features()
2023-09-13 16:56 [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features() Oliver Upton
2023-09-13 17:27 ` Jing Zhang
@ 2023-09-18 12:56 ` Zenghui Yu
2023-09-18 17:14 ` Oliver Upton
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Zenghui Yu @ 2023-09-18 12:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oliver Upton
Cc: kvmarm, kvm, Marc Zyngier, James Morse, Suzuki K Poulose,
Jing Zhang
On 2023/9/14 0:56, Oliver Upton wrote:
> A double-asterisk opening mark to the comment (i.e. '/**') indicates a
> comment block is in the kerneldoc format. There's automation in place to
> validate that kerneldoc blocks actually adhere to the formatting rules.
>
> The function comment for arm64_check_features() isn't kerneldoc; use a
> 'regular' comment to silence automation warnings.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/202309112251.e25LqfcK-lkp@intel.com/
> Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Reviewed-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features()
2023-09-13 16:56 [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features() Oliver Upton
2023-09-13 17:27 ` Jing Zhang
2023-09-18 12:56 ` Zenghui Yu
@ 2023-09-18 17:14 ` Oliver Upton
2 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Oliver Upton @ 2023-09-18 17:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Oliver Upton, kvmarm
Cc: Zenghui Yu, Suzuki K Poulose, Marc Zyngier, kvm, James Morse,
Jing Zhang
On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 16:56:44 +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> A double-asterisk opening mark to the comment (i.e. '/**') indicates a
> comment block is in the kerneldoc format. There's automation in place to
> validate that kerneldoc blocks actually adhere to the formatting rules.
>
> The function comment for arm64_check_features() isn't kerneldoc; use a
> 'regular' comment to silence automation warnings.
>
> [...]
Applied to kvmarm/next, thanks!
[1/1] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features()
https://git.kernel.org/kvmarm/kvmarm/c/7b424ffcd458
--
Best,
Oliver
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-09-18 17:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-09-13 16:56 [PATCH] KVM: arm64: Don't use kerneldoc comment for arm64_check_features() Oliver Upton
2023-09-13 17:27 ` Jing Zhang
2023-09-18 12:56 ` Zenghui Yu
2023-09-18 17:14 ` Oliver Upton
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).