From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 07/27] net: add for_each iterators through
 neighbour lower link's private
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:43:02 -0700
Message-ID: <1379418182.3457.2.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
References: <1379378812-18346-1-git-send-email-vfalico@redhat.com>
	 <1379378812-18346-8-git-send-email-vfalico@redhat.com>
	 <1379381203.23881.22.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>
	 <20130917073618.GC18195@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	jiri@resnulli.us, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
To: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@redhat.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pd0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:42481 "EHLO
	mail-pd0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752748Ab3IQLnE (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 17 Sep 2013 07:43:04 -0400
Received: by mail-pd0-f179.google.com with SMTP id v10so5439742pde.38
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 17 Sep 2013 04:43:03 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20130917073618.GC18195@redhat.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 09:36 +0200, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 02:26:43AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >On Tue, 2013-09-17 at 02:46 +0200, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> >[...]
> >> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> >> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> >> @@ -4537,6 +4537,72 @@ struct net_device *netdev_all_upper_get_next_dev_rcu(struct net_device *dev,
> >>  }
> >>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(netdev_all_upper_get_next_dev_rcu);
> >>
> >> +/* netdev_lower_get_next_private - Get the next ->private from the
> >> + *				   lower neighbour list
> >[...]
> >
> >This is not correct kernel-doc syntax.  You must begin the comment like
> >this:
> >
> >/**
> > * function_name - summary on one physical line, no wrapping allowed
> 
> I've thought that netdev specifically requires that type of comments*. But
> I don't have any strong opinion on that, so if needed - can change easily
> in the next version.
> 
> Thanks a lot!
> 
> *Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
> 
> Q: Someone said that the comment style and coding convention is different
>     for the networking content.  Is this true?
> 
> A: Yes, in a largely trivial way.  Instead of this:
> 
>          /*
>           * foobar blah blah blah
>           * another line of text
>           */
> 
>     it is requested that you make it look like this:
> 
>          /* foobar blah blah blah
>           * another line of text
>           */
> 
> 

Thats for comments, not kernel-doc sections.

You provided :

+/* netdev_lower_get_next_private - Get the next ->private from the
+ *                                lower neighbour list
+ * @dev: device
+ * @iter: list_head ** of the current position
+ *
+ * Gets the next netdev_adjacent->private from the dev's lower neighbour
+ * list, starting from iter position. The caller must hold either hold the
+ * RTNL lock or its own locking that guarantees that the neighbour lower
+ * list will remain unchainged. If iter is NULL - return the first private.
+ */

Which really looks like a kernel-doc section,
but misses the proper delimiter which is :

/**

Not 

/*