From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753679AbZHMIrz (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:47:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753537AbZHMIrz (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:47:55 -0400 Received: from cmpxchg.org ([85.214.51.133]:37508 "EHLO cmpxchg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752794AbZHMIry (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:47:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:47:24 +0200 From: Johannes Weiner To: Ingo Molnar Cc: James Bottomley , Andy Whitcroft , Alan Stern , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Kernel development list , Randy Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add kerneldoc for flush_scheduled_work() Message-ID: <20090813084724.GA24333@cmpxchg.org> References: <1250094123.4000.43.camel@mulgrave.site> <20090813072514.GF12143@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090813072514.GF12143@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 09:25:14AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * James Bottomley wrote: > > > On Wed, 2009-08-12 at 10:13 -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > > > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > And here I was thinking kerneldoc doesn't actually work > > > > > like that, but perhaps Randy fixed it so the initial > > > > > description can line-wrap? > > > > > > Yes, that's what I thought too. If kerneldoc has been fixed > > > then the description line certainly should get wrapped. > > > > I really don't think it needs to be fixed: it's a feature not a > > bug. It requires people writing kernel doc actually to think of > > one line summaries. > > As long as the argument is that it's good to have limitations just > because it has good effects as well (which the gist of your argument > seems to be), i disagree. > > That's a very basic argument of freedom. Just consider the Gestapo > which was also a 'feature' to keep criminals in check. Did you know > that there were record low levels of petty criminality both in nazi > Germany and during communism (and under just about any totalitarian > regime)? Still nobody in their right mind is arguing that just due > to that they are the right social model ... Although I really like how you Godwin'd kerneldoc comments ;-), we do have other features that are features because of their limiting effect all over the place, don't we? The 80-columns code rule e.g. or our limited set of allowed indenting characters. > I think this DocBook limitation needs to be fixed, because there are > legitimate cases where a function name got too long (for no fault of > its own, but for properties of the name-space it is operating in), > and we do not want a nanny state beat it into a single line. Agreed, just as in the other rules, one should be able to bend this one once in a while without technical consequences, i.e. without kerneldoc breaking.