From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>
Cc: miaox@cn.fujitsu.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, menage@google.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/2] cpusets: restructure the function update_cpumask() and update_nodemask()
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 22:57:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080529225708.74f65654.pj@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080529203042.19f76f09.rdunlap@xenotime.net>
Randy wrote:
> For static functions, it's up to the maintainer/developer whether to do that
> or not. But if the functions already have kernel-doc, there's no strong
> reason to remove it. And these look good currently, so I see no
> good reason to change them.
Ok - thank-you for the explanation.
I had this vague recollection that kernel-doc was just for non-static
functions, so when I saw Miao put kernel-doc comments on a static
routine, I looked around to see if that was normal.
I didn't see mention of static functions in kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt,
and in a brief survey, didn't happen to see any static functions with
kernel-doc comments. However my survey was so brief I even missed five
such functions in the file I maintain, kernel/cpuset.c. So from that
I came to the (apparently flawed) conclusion that it didn't make sense
to kernel-doc static functions, and so advised Miao.
I don't quite see what purpose kernel-doc would have for static
functions, and am still concerned that such would (mildly) clutter the
presentation of the externally visible cpuset functions in which those
who just use cpusets would be interested.
It remains, of course, important to have good documentation of
functions, static or not, but I would expect developers working inside
the kernel/cpuset.c file to look for documentation of functions
static to that file within the code and comments of that file, not in
kernel-doc.
However I am just the cpuset maintainer, not a kernel-doc expert.
I remain inclined toward removing the kernel-doc markings on static
functions in kernel/cpuset.c, but if you wish, Randy, to make a renewed
appeal for me not to do so, I will happily honor that appeal.
Life is good either way when we are discussing how to annotate
documentation, rather than lamenting its absence.
If you, Randy, felt inclined to explain the value of kernel-doc comments
on file static functions in kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt, that might be
valuable for the next person who travels this path.
Thank-you.
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.940.382.4214
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-30 3:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-29 7:07 [RFC] [PATCH 1/2] cpusets: restructure the function update_cpumask() and update_nodemask() Miao Xie
2008-05-29 8:16 ` Paul Jackson
2008-05-30 1:51 ` Miao Xie
2008-05-30 1:53 ` Paul Jackson
2008-05-30 2:16 ` Miao Xie
2008-05-30 2:22 ` Paul Jackson
2008-05-30 3:30 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-05-30 3:57 ` Paul Jackson [this message]
2008-05-30 4:27 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-05-30 5:24 ` Paul Jackson
2008-05-30 6:25 ` Paul Jackson
2008-05-30 9:46 ` Alan Cox
2008-05-30 15:22 ` Paul Jackson
2008-05-30 15:32 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-05-30 15:39 ` Randy Dunlap
2008-05-30 16:07 ` Paul Jackson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080529225708.74f65654.pj@sgi.com \
--to=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menage@google.com \
--cc=miaox@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox