[PATCH 0/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[PATCH 0/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Hongbo Li]

The former commit has added a new parameter @private to
iomap_readahead() and has been added in vfs-iomap branch [1],
so let's describe the parameter in this patch.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260114-neufahrzeuge-urfassung-103f4ab953be@brauner/

Hongbo Li (1):
  fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

 fs/iomap/buffered-io.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

-- 
2.22.0

[PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Hongbo Li]

The kernel test rebot reports the kernel-doc warning:

```
Warning: fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:624 function parameter 'private'
 not described in 'iomap_readahead'
```

The former commit in "iomap: stash iomap read ctx in the private
field of iomap_iter" has added a new parameter @private to
iomap_readahead(), so let's describe the parameter.

Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601261111.vIL9rhgD-lkp@intel.com/
Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>
---
 fs/iomap/buffered-io.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c b/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c
index b350cc2a82ab..857b16bb3474 100644
--- a/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c
+++ b/fs/iomap/buffered-io.c
@@ -609,6 +609,7 @@ static int iomap_readahead_iter(struct iomap_iter *iter,
  * iomap_readahead - Attempt to read pages from a file.
  * @ops: The operations vector for the filesystem.
  * @ctx: The ctx used for issuing readahead.
+ * @private: The filesystem-specific information for issuing iomap_iter.
  *
  * This function is for filesystems to call to implement their readahead
  * address_space operation.
-- 
2.22.0

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Gao Xiang]

On 2026/1/26 20:00, Hongbo Li wrote:
> The kernel test rebot reports the kernel-doc warning:
> 
> ```
> Warning: fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:624 function parameter 'private'
>   not described in 'iomap_readahead'
> ```
> 
> The former commit in "iomap: stash iomap read ctx in the private
> field of iomap_iter" has added a new parameter @private to
> iomap_readahead(), so let's describe the parameter.
> 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601261111.vIL9rhgD-lkp@intel.com/
> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>

Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>

btw, I don't think the cover letter is needed for
this single patch.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Christoph Hellwig]

Looks good:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Hongbo Li]

On 2026/1/26 20:38, Gao Xiang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2026/1/26 20:00, Hongbo Li wrote:
>> The kernel test rebot reports the kernel-doc warning:
>>
>> ```
>> Warning: fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:624 function parameter 'private'
>>   not described in 'iomap_readahead'
>> ```
>>
>> The former commit in "iomap: stash iomap read ctx in the private
>> field of iomap_iter" has added a new parameter @private to
>> iomap_readahead(), so let's describe the parameter.
>>
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>> Closes: 
>> https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601261111.vIL9rhgD-lkp@intel.com/
>> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>
> 
> btw, I don't think the cover letter is needed for
> this single patch.

Thank you!

I would like to use this to indicate that this is a patch based on the 
vfs-iomap branch. Maybe another way might be possible to place this 
information in the hidden area after the SOB.

Thanks,
Hongbo

> 
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Gao Xiang]

On 2026/1/26 21:01, Hongbo Li wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2026/1/26 20:38, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2026/1/26 20:00, Hongbo Li wrote:
>>> The kernel test rebot reports the kernel-doc warning:
>>>
>>> ```
>>> Warning: fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:624 function parameter 'private'
>>>   not described in 'iomap_readahead'
>>> ```
>>>
>>> The former commit in "iomap: stash iomap read ctx in the private
>>> field of iomap_iter" has added a new parameter @private to
>>> iomap_readahead(), so let's describe the parameter.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601261111.vIL9rhgD-lkp@intel.com/
>>> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>
>>
>> btw, I don't think the cover letter is needed for
>> this single patch.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> I would like to use this to indicate that this is a patch based on the vfs-iomap branch. Maybe another way might be possible to place this information in the hidden area after the SOB.

The best practice for a single patch is to drop those comments
after the first `---` line.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> 
> Thanks,
> Hongbo
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gao Xiang

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Hongbo Li]

On 2026/1/26 21:08, Gao Xiang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2026/1/26 21:01, Hongbo Li wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2026/1/26 20:38, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2026/1/26 20:00, Hongbo Li wrote:
>>>> The kernel test rebot reports the kernel-doc warning:
>>>>
>>>> ```
>>>> Warning: fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:624 function parameter 'private'
>>>>   not described in 'iomap_readahead'
>>>> ```
>>>>
>>>> The former commit in "iomap: stash iomap read ctx in the private
>>>> field of iomap_iter" has added a new parameter @private to
>>>> iomap_readahead(), so let's describe the parameter.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>>>> Closes: 
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601261111.vIL9rhgD-lkp@intel.com/
>>>> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>
>>>
>>> btw, I don't think the cover letter is needed for
>>> this single patch.
>>
>> Thank you!
>>
>> I would like to use this to indicate that this is a patch based on the 
>> vfs-iomap branch. Maybe another way might be possible to place this 
>> information in the hidden area after the SOB.
> 
> The best practice for a single patch is to drop those comments
> after the first `---` line.
> 

Ok, got it, and thank you!

Thanks,
Hongbo

> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang
> 
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Hongbo
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Gao Xiang
> 

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Gao Xiang]

Hi Christian,

On 2026/1/26 20:00, Hongbo Li wrote:
> The kernel test rebot reports the kernel-doc warning:
> 
> ```
> Warning: fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:624 function parameter 'private'
>   not described in 'iomap_readahead'
> ```
> 
> The former commit in "iomap: stash iomap read ctx in the private
> field of iomap_iter" has added a new parameter @private to
> iomap_readahead(), so let's describe the parameter.
> 
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601261111.vIL9rhgD-lkp@intel.com/
> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>

Could you apply this single patch kernel-doc fix directly?

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

Re: [PATCH 1/1] fs/iomap: Describle @private in iomap_readahead()

[Hongbo Li]

Hi Christian,

Sorry to bother you. Have you missed applying this patch? Or need more 
update.

Thanks,
Hongbo

On 2026/1/29 17:21, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> 
> On 2026/1/26 20:00, Hongbo Li wrote:
>> The kernel test rebot reports the kernel-doc warning:
>>
>> ```
>> Warning: fs/iomap/buffered-io.c:624 function parameter 'private'
>>   not described in 'iomap_readahead'
>> ```
>>
>> The former commit in "iomap: stash iomap read ctx in the private
>> field of iomap_iter" has added a new parameter @private to
>> iomap_readahead(), so let's describe the parameter.
>>
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
>> Closes: 
>> https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202601261111.vIL9rhgD-lkp@intel.com/
>> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Li <lihongbo22@huawei.com>
> 
> Could you apply this single patch kernel-doc fix directly?
> 
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang