On 2/26/26 11:10 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Fix some kernel-doc warnings in openvswitch.h:
> 
> Mark enum placeholders that are not used as "private" so that kernel-doc
> comments are not needed for them.
> 
> Correct names for 2 enum values:
> Warning: include/uapi/linux/openvswitch.h:300 Excess enum value
>  '@OVS_VPORT_UPCALL_SUCCESS' description in 'ovs_vport_upcall_attr'
> Warning: include/uapi/linux/openvswitch.h:300 Excess enum value
>  '@OVS_VPORT_UPCALL_FAIL' description in 'ovs_vport_upcall_attr'
> 
> Warning: include/uapi/linux/openvswitch.h:638 This comment starts with
>  '/**', but isn't a kernel-doc comment.
>  * Omit attributes for notifications.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
> ---

Hi, Randy.  Thanks for the fixes!

If the private/public is the style to follow, it sounds good to me,
though there seem to be an inconsistency in how the kernel-only
attributes are marked.  I see the OVS_SAMPLE_ATTR_ARG is in the
private section, but OVS_CHECK_PKT_LEN_ATTR_ARG and the
OVS_ACTION_ATTR_SET_TO_MASKED are public.  They should either all
be public or all private, as they are used for very similar purposes,
which is storing extra information about the action to make it easier
for the kernel to work with them.  These attributes should never be
used in the communication with userspace.  So, maybe private?

__OVS_CHECK_PKT_LEN_ATTR_MAX is also public for some reason.  I guess,
it is because while it has kernel-doc-style comment, it doesn't start
with /**, so it's not treated like one.  Maybe we should fix that here
just to be consistent?

note: Some enums and structures do not have kernel-doc comments, so
I guess that's the reason to not mark them.  I suppose it's fine,
since adding extra docs is not the purpose of this patch.

nit: the subject prefix is a little strange.

Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to