[PATCH net] net: fix skb_page_frag_refill() kerneldoc

[PATCH net] net: fix skb_page_frag_refill() kerneldoc

[Eric Dumazet]

From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>

In commit d9b2938aabf7 ("net: attempt a single high order allocation)
I forgot to update kerneldoc, as @prio parameter was renamed to @gfp

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
---
 net/core/sock.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
index d372b4bd3f99..9c3f823e76a9 100644
--- a/net/core/sock.c
+++ b/net/core/sock.c
@@ -1866,7 +1866,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sock_alloc_send_skb);
  * skb_page_frag_refill - check that a page_frag contains enough room
  * @sz: minimum size of the fragment we want to get
  * @pfrag: pointer to page_frag
- * @prio: priority for memory allocation
+ * @gfp: priority for memory allocation
  *
  * Note: While this allocator tries to use high order pages, there is
  * no guarantee that allocations succeed. Therefore, @sz MUST be

Re: [PATCH net] net: fix skb_page_frag_refill() kerneldoc

[Sergei Shtylyov]

Hello.

On 9/8/2014 3:00 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>

> In commit d9b2938aabf7 ("net: attempt a single high order allocation)
> I forgot to update kerneldoc, as @prio parameter was renamed to @gfp

> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> ---
>   net/core/sock.c |    2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

> diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
> index d372b4bd3f99..9c3f823e76a9 100644
> --- a/net/core/sock.c
> +++ b/net/core/sock.c
> @@ -1866,7 +1866,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sock_alloc_send_skb);
>    * skb_page_frag_refill - check that a page_frag contains enough room
>    * @sz: minimum size of the fragment we want to get
>    * @pfrag: pointer to page_frag
> - * @prio: priority for memory allocation
> + * @gfp: priority for memory allocation

    'gfp' is not priority, it's just flags.

WBR, Sergei

Re: [PATCH net] net: fix skb_page_frag_refill() kerneldoc

[Eric Dumazet]

On Mon, 2014-09-08 at 15:04 +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On 9/8/2014 3:00 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> 
> > In commit d9b2938aabf7 ("net: attempt a single high order allocation)
> > I forgot to update kerneldoc, as @prio parameter was renamed to @gfp
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> > ---
> >   net/core/sock.c |    2 +-
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
> > index d372b4bd3f99..9c3f823e76a9 100644
> > --- a/net/core/sock.c
> > +++ b/net/core/sock.c
> > @@ -1866,7 +1866,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sock_alloc_send_skb);
> >    * skb_page_frag_refill - check that a page_frag contains enough room
> >    * @sz: minimum size of the fragment we want to get
> >    * @pfrag: pointer to page_frag
> > - * @prio: priority for memory allocation
> > + * @gfp: priority for memory allocation
> 
>     'gfp' is not priority, it's just flags.

This is the usual wording for this in net/core

I changed the name of the argument, not its meaning.

$ scripts/kernel-doc net/core/sock.c >/dev/null
Warning(net/core/sock.c:1874): No description found for parameter 'gfp'
Warning(net/core/sock.c:1874): Excess function parameter 'prio'
description in 'skb_page_frag_refill'

Feel free to submit a net-next patch to change net/core occurrences.

Thanks

Re: [PATCH net] net: fix skb_page_frag_refill() kerneldoc

[David Miller]

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 04:00:00 -0700

> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> 
> In commit d9b2938aabf7 ("net: attempt a single high order allocation)
> I forgot to update kerneldoc, as @prio parameter was renamed to @gfp
> 
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>

Applied, thanks.

Re: [PATCH net] net: fix skb_page_frag_refill() kerneldoc

[David Miller]

From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:04:28 +0400

>> - * @prio: priority for memory allocation
>> + * @gfp: priority for memory allocation
> 
>    'gfp' is not priority, it's just flags.

It is an allocation priority, and I've seen that terminology used for
2 decades.