Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces

Guenter Roeck
2024-03-29T15:40:09Z

On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 07:39:20PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
[ ... ]
> > >
> > > Hi Guenter,
> > >
> > > a minor nit from my side: this change results in a Kernel doc warning.
> > >
> > > .../bug.h:29: warning: expecting prototype for _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY(). Prototype was for HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION() instead
> > >
> > > Perhaps either the new code should be placed above the Kernel doc,
> > > or scripts/kernel-doc should be enhanced?
> > >
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the feedback.
> >
> > The definition block needs to be inside CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE,
> > so it would be a bit odd to move it above the documentation
> > just to make kerneldoc happy. I am not really sure that to do
> > about it.
>
> FWIIW, I agree that would be odd.
> But perhaps the #ifdef could also move above the Kernel doc?
> Maybe not a great idea, but the best one I've had so far.
>

I did that for the next version of the patch series. It is a bit more
clumsy, so I left it as separate patch on top of this patch. I'd
still like to get input from others before making the change final.

Thanks,
Guenter