From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:53224 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933993AbeF1UlO (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:41:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:41:11 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Yordan Karadzhov (VMware)" Cc: linux-trace-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] kernel-shark-qt: Add API for loading trace.dat files Message-ID: <20180628164111.772498cf@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20180628163235.3a2422f7@gandalf.local.home> References: <20180628163012.21477-1-y.karadz@gmail.com> <20180628163012.21477-4-y.karadz@gmail.com> <20180628163235.3a2422f7@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-trace-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:32:35 -0400 Steven Rostedt wrote: > I understand the rational for having it above the prototype, because > you would think that's where people may look if they don't have the > source (just the headers). But realistically, people who use etags and > such, when they want to see a function, the vim and emacs commands will > bring the user to the C code and not the prototype. This is why Linux > enforces the comments above the C code. One more reason for having the comments above the code and not the prototype (which I'm struggling with right now), is that when reviewing a function, I have no idea what it's suppose to be doing. I need to search the header to find the comments associated with it. Makes reviewing much more time consuming. -- Steve