From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, avi@redhat.com,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, ghaskins@novell.com, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
bcrl@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [patch] eventfd - revised interface and cleanups (2nd rev)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:46:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090623144638.22ca61ea.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0906231428460.17001@makko.or.mcafeemobile.com>
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > > Should functions be describing all the returned error codes, ala man pages?
> > >
> >
> > I think so.
>
> This becomes pretty painful when the function calls other functions, for
> which just relays the error code.
> Should we be just documenting the error codes introduced by the function
> code, and say that the function returns errors A, B, C plus all the ones
> returned by the called functions X, Y, Z?
> If not, it becomes hell in maintaining the comments...
Well. Don't worry about making rules. Taste and common sense apply. "Will
it be useful to readers if I explicitly document the return value". If
"yes" then document away. If "no" then don't.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-23 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-23 16:47 [patch] eventfd - revised interface and cleanups Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 16:59 ` Randy Dunlap
2009-06-23 17:04 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 17:03 ` Avi Kivity
2009-06-23 17:04 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 17:51 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-06-23 17:51 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 19:25 ` [patch] eventfd - revised interface and cleanups (2nd rev) Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 19:48 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 19:49 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 20:12 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 20:59 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 21:25 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 21:25 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 21:44 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 22:49 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 23:18 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-24 22:47 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-24 23:12 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-24 23:52 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-25 0:33 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 20:18 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 21:03 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 21:29 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 21:28 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 21:34 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 21:46 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-06-23 21:48 ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-23 22:07 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-23 22:46 ` [patch] eventfd - revised interface and cleanups (3rd rev) Davide Libenzi
2009-06-24 23:57 ` [patch] eventfd - revised interface and cleanups (4th rev) Davide Libenzi
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=20090623144638.22ca61ea.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/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