Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
On 07/16/2012 03:35 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:34:46 +0800, Alex Shi wrote: >>> >> >>> And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the >>> latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch >>> is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. >>> >> >> >> >> Thanks for reminder! I just know this rule now. :) > > Thanks, folded. > > As long as it's readable, I don't care. > > If it's not all there, did I miss an update? No. all contents in my original patch were checked in. > > Cheers, > Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:34:46 +0800, Alex Shi wrote: > > > > > And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the > > latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch > > is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. > > > > > > Thanks for reminder! I just know this rule now. :) Thanks, folded. As long as it's readable, I don't care. If it's not all there, did I miss an update? Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:34:46 +0800, Alex Shi alex@intel.com wrote: And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. Thanks for reminder! I just know this rule now. :) Thanks, folded. As long as it's readable, I don't care. If it's not all there, did I miss an update? Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
On 07/16/2012 03:35 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:34:46 +0800, Alex Shi alex@intel.com wrote: And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. Thanks for reminder! I just know this rule now. :) Thanks, folded. As long as it's readable, I don't care. If it's not all there, did I miss an update? No. all contents in my original patch were checked in. Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
> > And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the > latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch > is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. > Thanks for reminder! I just know this rule now. :) === >From 7b227fd186f0abc4b5fb1b7b768253d489f1ed56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alex Shi Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:52:33 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] cpumask: fix kernel-doc incompatible comments commit c4549cd0d77 introduced some kernel-doc incompatible comments format, that make kernel-doc output mess and looks strange. like the part of man cpumask_subset, the DESCRIPTION part merged into ARGUMENTS incorrectly: ARGUMENTS src1p the first input src2p the second input Returns 1 if *src1p is a subset of *src2p, else returns 0 Signed-off-by: Alex Shi --- include/linux/cpumask.h | 18 -- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h index 170c5af..8bf1c27 100644 --- a/include/linux/cpumask.h +++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h @@ -271,7 +271,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *dstp) * cpumask_test_cpu - test for a cpu in a cpumask * @cpu: cpu number (< nr_cpu_ids) * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer - * Returns 1 if 'cpu' is set in 'cpumask', else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if @cpu is set in @cpumask, else returns 0 * * No static inline type checking - see Subtlety (1) above. */ @@ -282,7 +283,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *dstp) * cpumask_test_and_set_cpu - atomically test and set a cpu in a cpumask * @cpu: cpu number (< nr_cpu_ids) * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer - * Returns 1 if 'cpu' is set in old bitmap of 'cpumask', else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if @cpu is set in old bitmap of @cpumask, else returns 0 * * test_and_set_bit wrapper for cpumasks. */ @@ -295,7 +297,8 @@ static inline int cpumask_test_and_set_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *cpumask) * cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu - atomically test and clear a cpu in a cpumask * @cpu: cpu number (< nr_cpu_ids) * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer - * Returns 1 if 'cpu' is set in old bitmap of 'cpumask', else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if @cpu is set in old bitmap of @cpumask, else returns 0 * * test_and_clear_bit wrapper for cpumasks. */ @@ -327,7 +330,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear(struct cpumask *dstp) * @dstp: the cpumask result * @src1p: the first input * @src2p: the second input - * If *dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 + * + * If *@dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 */ static inline int cpumask_and(struct cpumask *dstp, const struct cpumask *src1p, @@ -369,7 +373,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_xor(struct cpumask *dstp, * @dstp: the cpumask result * @src1p: the first input * @src2p: the second input - * If *dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 + * + * If *@dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 */ static inline int cpumask_andnot(struct cpumask *dstp, const struct cpumask *src1p, @@ -419,7 +424,8 @@ static inline bool cpumask_intersects(const struct cpumask *src1p, * cpumask_subset - (*src1p & ~*src2p) == 0 * @src1p: the first input * @src2p: the second input - * Returns 1 if *src1p is a subset of *src2p, else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if *@src1p is a subset of *@src2p, else returns 0 */ static inline int cpumask_subset(const struct cpumask *src1p, const struct cpumask *src2p) -- 1.7.5.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. Thanks for reminder! I just know this rule now. :) === From 7b227fd186f0abc4b5fb1b7b768253d489f1ed56 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alex Shi alex@intel.com Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 09:52:33 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] cpumask: fix kernel-doc incompatible comments commit c4549cd0d77 introduced some kernel-doc incompatible comments format, that make kernel-doc output mess and looks strange. like the part of man cpumask_subset, the DESCRIPTION part merged into ARGUMENTS incorrectly: ARGUMENTS src1p the first input src2p the second input Returns 1 if *src1p is a subset of *src2p, else returns 0 Signed-off-by: Alex Shi alex@intel.com --- include/linux/cpumask.h | 18 -- 1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h index 170c5af..8bf1c27 100644 --- a/include/linux/cpumask.h +++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h @@ -271,7 +271,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *dstp) * cpumask_test_cpu - test for a cpu in a cpumask * @cpu: cpu number ( nr_cpu_ids) * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer - * Returns 1 if 'cpu' is set in 'cpumask', else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if @cpu is set in @cpumask, else returns 0 * * No static inline type checking - see Subtlety (1) above. */ @@ -282,7 +283,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *dstp) * cpumask_test_and_set_cpu - atomically test and set a cpu in a cpumask * @cpu: cpu number ( nr_cpu_ids) * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer - * Returns 1 if 'cpu' is set in old bitmap of 'cpumask', else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if @cpu is set in old bitmap of @cpumask, else returns 0 * * test_and_set_bit wrapper for cpumasks. */ @@ -295,7 +297,8 @@ static inline int cpumask_test_and_set_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *cpumask) * cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu - atomically test and clear a cpu in a cpumask * @cpu: cpu number ( nr_cpu_ids) * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer - * Returns 1 if 'cpu' is set in old bitmap of 'cpumask', else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if @cpu is set in old bitmap of @cpumask, else returns 0 * * test_and_clear_bit wrapper for cpumasks. */ @@ -327,7 +330,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear(struct cpumask *dstp) * @dstp: the cpumask result * @src1p: the first input * @src2p: the second input - * If *dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 + * + * If *@dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 */ static inline int cpumask_and(struct cpumask *dstp, const struct cpumask *src1p, @@ -369,7 +373,8 @@ static inline void cpumask_xor(struct cpumask *dstp, * @dstp: the cpumask result * @src1p: the first input * @src2p: the second input - * If *dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 + * + * If *@dstp is empty, returns 0, else returns 1 */ static inline int cpumask_andnot(struct cpumask *dstp, const struct cpumask *src1p, @@ -419,7 +424,8 @@ static inline bool cpumask_intersects(const struct cpumask *src1p, * cpumask_subset - (*src1p ~*src2p) == 0 * @src1p: the first input * @src2p: the second input - * Returns 1 if *src1p is a subset of *src2p, else returns 0 + * + * Returns 1 if *@src1p is a subset of *@src2p, else returns 0 */ static inline int cpumask_subset(const struct cpumask *src1p, const struct cpumask *src2p) -- 1.7.5.4 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
On Mon, 28 May 2012 22:23:51 +0800 Alex Shi wrote: > Current few cpumask functions' purposes are not quite clear. Stupid > user like myself need to dig into details for clear function > purpose and return value. > Add few explanation for them is helpful. > It appears that Rusty has applied at least some of this patch to linux-next. Without reading it ;) > --- a/include/linux/cpumask.h > +++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h > @@ -271,6 +271,7 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear_cpu(int cpu, struct > cpumask *dstp) > * cpumask_test_cpu - test for a cpu in a cpumask > * @cpu: cpu number (< nr_cpu_ids) > * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer > + * Returns 1 if the 'cpu' is in the old bitmap of 'cpumask', otherwise > returns 0 In kerneldoc we refer to function arguments by prefixing them with a '@', not by surrounding them with single quotes. So this should be * Returns 1 if @cpu is in the old bitmap of @cpumask, otherwise returns 0 And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] cpumask: add a few comments of cpumask functions
On Mon, 28 May 2012 22:23:51 +0800 Alex Shi alex@intel.com wrote: Current few cpumask functions' purposes are not quite clear. Stupid user like myself need to dig into details for clear function purpose and return value. Add few explanation for them is helpful. It appears that Rusty has applied at least some of this patch to linux-next. Without reading it ;) --- a/include/linux/cpumask.h +++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h @@ -271,6 +271,7 @@ static inline void cpumask_clear_cpu(int cpu, struct cpumask *dstp) * cpumask_test_cpu - test for a cpu in a cpumask * @cpu: cpu number ( nr_cpu_ids) * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer + * Returns 1 if the 'cpu' is in the old bitmap of 'cpumask', otherwise returns 0 In kerneldoc we refer to function arguments by prefixing them with a '@', not by surrounding them with single quotes. So this should be * Returns 1 if @cpu is in the old bitmap of @cpumask, otherwise returns 0 And the same applies to the other comments. So can you please grab the latest linux-next, prepare a fixup patch and also check that the patch is complete - not all of your changes have been applied. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
