From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753649Ab3IQRJi (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:09:38 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:52756 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753406Ab3IQRJg (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 13:09:36 -0400 Message-ID: <52388CC4.7040101@infradead.org> Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 10:09:24 -0700 From: Randy Dunlap User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Brown CC: LKML , Linus Torvalds , Liam Girdwood Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: fix fatal kernel-doc error References: <5237AB72.5020806@infradead.org> <20130917103238.GM21013@sirena.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20130917103238.GM21013@sirena.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/17/13 03:32, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 06:08:02PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: >> From: Randy Dunlap >> >> Fix fatal kernel-doc error in : >> >> Error(include/linux/regulator/driver.h:52): cannot understand prototype: 'struct regulator_linear_range ' > > Applied with the first line redone, but this seems like really terrible > quality of implementation for the kernel-doc stuff - it shouldn't > explode over something readily copable with like this. Should we also > not pick this sort of thing up in -next? /** means kernel-doc syntax and it was not in proper kernel-doc format, but maybe it could just be a Warning instead of a fatal Error. Ideally we should pick it up in -next, of course, but I doubt that anyone is running kernel-doc on linux-next. I used to do that, but there are too many errors/warnings. I suppose that I could just concentrate on (fatal) Errors in linux-next and ignore the Warnings. -- ~Randy