On Wed, 07 Dec 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> Spotted while auditing our ioctl table. Also nuke the
> not-really-kerneldoc comments, we don't document internals and
> definitely don't want to mislead people with the old dragons.
Not just specific to this patch, but I'm not sure I agree with the
On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 11:28:54AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Dec 2016, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > Spotted while auditing our ioctl table. Also nuke the
> > not-really-kerneldoc comments, we don't document internals and
> > definitely don't want to mislead people with the old dragons.
>
Spotted while auditing our ioctl table. Also nuke the
not-really-kerneldoc comments, we don't document internals and
definitely don't want to mislead people with the old dragons.
I think with this all the legacy ioctls now have proper drm_legacy_
prefixes.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter
---
