From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964888AbWFSVIr (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:08:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964889AbWFSVIr (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:08:47 -0400 Received: from xenotime.net ([66.160.160.81]:17540 "HELO xenotime.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S964888AbWFSVIr (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Jun 2006 17:08:47 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 14:11:27 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: tglx@linutronix.de Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, mingo@elte.hr Subject: Re: [PATCH] ktime/hrtimer: fix kernel-doc comments Message-Id: <20060619141127.abdfdac0.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: <1150750822.29299.86.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20060619130948.6ea3998c.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <1150750822.29299.86.camel@localhost.localdomain> Organization: YPO4 X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.5 (GTK+ 2.8.3; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 23:00:22 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Randy, > > On Mon, 2006-06-19 at 13:09 -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > > From: Randy Dunlap > > > > Fix kernel-doc formatting in ktime.h and hrtimer.[ch] files. > > > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap > > --- > > include/linux/hrtimer.h | 3 --- > > include/linux/ktime.h | 8 -------- > > kernel/hrtimer.c | 11 +---------- > > 3 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 21 deletions(-) > > > > --- linux-2617-pv.orig/include/linux/ktime.h > > +++ linux-2617-pv/include/linux/ktime.h > > @@ -66,7 +66,6 @@ typedef union { > > > > /** > > * ktime_set - Set a ktime_t variable from a seconds/nanoseconds value > > - * > > * @secs: seconds to set > > * @nsecs: nanoseconds to set > > * > <.....> > > Is there any real reason for doing this, expect for removing the blank > comment lines ? Hm, have you looked at the kernel-doc output of those functions? With the blank line, the function Description section (if there is one) is duplicated. If there is not a Description section in the source file, then there is a (false) header generated for it but nothing below it. > My personal preference is to keep that line, as it makes it easier to > read. But as always: de gustibus non est disputandum :) Feel free to send patches for scripts/kernel-doc instead. :) --- ~Randy