From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 13:00:47 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] KernelDoc In-Reply-To: <20120926195412.AC7B32031A9@gemini.denx.de> References: <201209252246.10322.marex@denx.de> <20120926071743.238A42031A9@gemini.denx.de> <201209261726.55611.marex@denx.de> <20120926195412.AC7B32031A9@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <50635EEF.1060601@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/26/12 12:54, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Can such checking (all functions have a kernel-doc comment, which > covers the return value and all arguments) be done automatically, > say throuch checkpatch? It's been a long time but I believe you see those problems when you generate the docs, but not checkpatch (from a quick skim of the code in the kernel). - -- Tom -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQY17uAAoJENk4IS6UOR1WBw4P+wZRQV9Az8+O3MfkI+jGR0BF hrt0VRbn9i3EaUPlFsRIE2FSeeTYgSb+F7DY7BYg7H9REkuzCbJgUEmYHguN4F+x fbq+cH3axkNISs3xnI4Y3GH6jTTdePgT4jWMjMLGjwpiskValEDUwTw+qVkWDtri AKUBCCpJsjm39Ig94hbhQKr0iLwNQfO4I9itOQVbVtP92+uVN/xR9WGyN1APUrEC XUAlw+myZE2YFTaSPSceZK/5UHxtQVYTg1VZMmwd5K5ReGvmUWQS+4qpTOFA6XaT XYmNqw3/UXIhwM07+mfgHvvf+KJm7wRncaBzh8U1SDkaf8p2VaYrNTcLrCoWWIKg Nv7vTgb4s5avBdRhIdmZpVsOel4srfkBfYn18J8Zhv0fPuf0KGRBHsHTfK+jAJVy qms02hvnidg5iuwdeNPF+C0tweErxcI8BtDJA2mKBmXzu2REXX1D+uOLdtzLlLeW 8tBbR06lEXeVar42LGQEqfrlcaIKXC+UFBxLnSF/o0ZyP/5Od8WUIGeoK15ZGLhf BebN3uT3+6RTdIdmiNlpUxvUnsGqaiLHedT8V8gZRtqCrxEhHwB6Q5Gl7Xu1qjMW kxsc1aYzlJooWEiQZjMR7BxlUTPdgca2GX3wiV6YxhZQIyd3MY14utp2Joglizs1 XjlOSbjGTTIEuTiFh9vO =9aWt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----