From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: [PATCH 3 of 5] virtio: support unlocked queue kick Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 21:06:09 +1030 Message-ID: <87k47grx7q.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <20111103075211.GD6993@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Christoph Hellwig , virtualization , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20111103075211.GD6993@infradead.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 03:52:11 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:12:51PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: > > Based on patch by Christoph for virtio_blk speedup: > > Please credit it to Stefan - he also sent a pointer to his original > version in reply to the previous thread. > > Also shouldn't virtqueue_kick have kerneldoc comments? Yep, and I've credited it properly. > I also notices that you documented the functions bother here and in > the first patch in the headers. At least historically the kerneldoc > tools didn't parse comments at declarations, but only at the function > defintions. Did you check these actually get picked up? Gah, I'd forgotten that the kernel tendency is to put the interface documentation next to the implementation. Personally, I think extracting it is insane, but I've moved them. Thanks, Rusty.