From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09BBDCD1284 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 13:42:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 786383CE3CB for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:42:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (in-5.smtp.seeweb.it [IPv6:2001:4b78:1:20::5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F099D3C13E8 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:42:29 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: in-5.smtp.seeweb.it; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=suse.cz (client-ip=195.135.223.130; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de; envelope-from=pvorel@suse.cz; receiver=lists.linux.it) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 764B0600C4A for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:42:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:98]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF66337C1C; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 13:42:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; none Received: from imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 928A3139E8; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 13:42:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap2.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id oQjZHkSuDmaCeAAAn2gu4w (envelope-from ); Thu, 04 Apr 2024 13:42:28 +0000 Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 15:42:23 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Cyril Hrubis Message-ID: <20240404134223.GA526878@pevik> References: <20240403082618.5829-1-chrubis@suse.cz> <20240403082618.5829-3-chrubis@suse.cz> <20240404125124.GC503552@pevik> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 50.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BF66337C1C X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd2.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 1.0.3 at in-5.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v3 2/2] include: doc: Convert comments into linuxdoc X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" > Hi! > > Very nit: I would prefer if the formatting would not force the indent, e.g.: > > * @tcnt: A number of tests. If set the test() callback is called tcnt times > > * and each time passed an increasing counter value. > > Because variables with long name will require more lines, but feel free to > > ignore it. > I do not have a strong opinion here, but I guess that we should add at > least a single space before the subsequent lines so that it's clear that > it's a continuation. That's IMHO better, but feel free to ignore (it's not important). > Does anyone else have an opinion on this? > > > + * @options: An NULL optstr terminated array of struct tst_option. > > > + * > > > + * @min_kver: A minimal kernel version the test can run on. e.g. "3.10". > > > + * > > > + * @supported_archs: A NULL terminated array of architectures the test runs on > > > + * e.g. {"x86_64, "x86", NULL}. Calls tst_is_on_arch() to > > > + * check if current CPU architecture is supported and exits > > > + * the test with TCONF if it's not. > > > + * > > ... > > > void (*setup)(void); > > > void (*cleanup)(void); > > > - > > > void (*test)(unsigned int test_nr); > > > void (*test_all)(void); > > > - /* Syscall name used by the timer measurement library */ > > We decided to drop this comment. Isn't it useful? > > > const char *scall; > > > - > > > - /* Sampling function for timer measurement testcases */ > > > int (*sample)(int clk_id, long long usec); > > And this one as well. > The sampling is a kind of hack, I would like to rethink it a bit if it > can't be done in a cleaner way before documenting it. Sure, ack. Kind regards, Petr -- Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp