On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 8:36 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) > to consider: > - [Low] dyndbg: documentation references future struct _ddebug_class_map > -- > > commit 4edbf52dcd2e7bd06805f06e89c8d2ce8672c81b > Author: Jim Cromie <[email protected]> > > dyndbg-API: remove DD_CLASS_TYPE_(DISJOINT|LEVEL)_NAMES and code > > This commit removes the unused DD_CLASS_TYPE_DISJOINT_NAMES and > DD_CLASS_TYPE_LEVEL_NAMES classmap types and their corresponding code. > It also renames enum class_map_type to enum ddebug_class_map_type. > > > diff --git a/include/linux/dynamic_debug.h b/include/linux/dynamic_debug.h > > index a10adac8e8f00..9607121c3072e 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/dynamic_debug.h > > +++ b/include/linux/dynamic_debug.h > > [ ... ] > > > @@ -119,8 +109,8 @@ struct ddebug_class_param { > > > > /** > > * DECLARE_DYNDBG_CLASSMAP - declare classnames known by a module > > - * @_var: a struct ddebug_class_map, passed to module_param_cb > > - * @_type: enum class_map_type, chooses bits/verbose, numeric/symbolic > > + * @_var: a struct _ddebug_class_map, passed to module_param_cb > > [Severity: Low] > This isn't a bug, but does this documentation reference a struct that doesn't > exist yet? > > The comment here refers to struct _ddebug_class_map (with an underscore), > but the macro DECLARE_DYNDBG_CLASSMAP currently instantiates struct > ddebug_class_map. Is it intentional to document the future name before the > actual struct rename occurs in a later patch?
yes, intentional. using future-name avoids having to fix it later. > > > + * @_maptype: enum ddebug_class_map_type, chooses bits/verbose > > * @_base: offset of 1st class-name. splits .class_id space > > * @classes: class-names used to control class'd prdbgs > > */ > > -- > Sashiko AI review · > https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=10
