On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 13:25:37 -0600 Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:02:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I blame kernel-doc. It should have a slot for documenting the return value,
> > but it doesn't, so nobody documents return values.
Anyone can add what kernel-doc sees as a section. Just use:
* Returns:
* and describe the return values.
> There's also the question about where the documentation should go. By
> the function prototype in the header? That's the easy place for people
> using the function to find it. By the code? That's the place where it
> stands the most chance (about 10%) of somebody bothering to update it
> when they change the code.
Good questions. Jury is still out, I suppose.
> > It should have a slot for documenting caller-provided locking requirements
> > too. And for permissible calling-contexts. They're all part of the
> > caller-provided environment, and these two tend to be a heck of a lot more
> > subtle than the function's formal arguments.
>
> Indeed. And reference count assumptions. It's almost like we want a
> pre-condition assertion ...
I want context documentation:
* Context:
* Interrupt or process or bh/softirq etc. (or Any)
---
~Randy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
