From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B15CD1D0400; Fri, 8 Nov 2024 11:15:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731064505; cv=none; b=YnY9DPshdsw7Y8A+ayfjpaTeE6ii7JNcAW6dEYb/aUcjvAVRCF0LLxrzKhybHrKmnIn80agiyV+hFTb/ziLjhSrA9n+QNZ9NNBzsCJjRurDQQkjUkVh+lYPS0UVb8gTUpDtEkDg9Y725ejfyKLuDkdXQkZOXptLbAH7pLh1qwGA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731064505; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DrS9z4j0wSvNsWrj0iM7gd2sljO/gTrUX1dW8YuZDrg=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=raTmQp2w4djkz77IjyhxWQokeDvGoeulj7xz532hs0eTarw33dQjF39zMpaAEaf/80sQzn8lPTkVfuNhOT4D63qPhvkv+ELngqce1E7RbqSOUSN0R3qa8MHStosshawpE6mh5RoiNcWh4Uv3BnxC9iwXNrG0Jpt627py0xQMAmw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.31]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4XlGWp5TLzz6K9R2; Fri, 8 Nov 2024 19:13:10 +0800 (CST) Received: from frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.182.85.71]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9ABF81401F4; Fri, 8 Nov 2024 19:14:53 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.66) by frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.71) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Fri, 8 Nov 2024 12:14:53 +0100 Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2024 11:14:51 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Andy Shevchenko CC: Jonathan Cameron , , "Jonathan Corbet" , Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: Move __private marking before struct element priv in struct iio_dev Message-ID: <20241108111451.00005fd0@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20241107185746.138146-1-jic23@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100004.china.huawei.com (7.191.162.219) To frapeml500008.china.huawei.com (7.182.85.71) On Fri, 8 Nov 2024 10:41:02 +0200 Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 06:57:46PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > From: Jonathan Cameron > > > > This is to avoid tripping up kernel-doc which filters it out before > > but not after the name. > > > > Fixes: > > ./include/linux/iio/iio.h:628: warning: Function parameter or struct member '__private' not described in 'iio_dev' > > ./include/linux/iio/iio.h:628: warning: Excess struct member 'priv' description in 'iio_dev' > > ... > > > - void *priv __private; > > + void __private *priv; > > }; > > This is still inconsistent from the position perspective (while may still > work). I specifically placed it there, otherwise what you need is to have > > void * __private priv; > > to be fully consistent. > > That said, either you need to carefully reindent all the affected members, > or fix the kernel-doc, or both. Doh. Indeed. The marking was wrong and sparse tripped on it. I'll switch to void * __private priv; hideous though that is and not worry about indenting. We can then decide next cycle whether to tidy up better. >