From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Maíra Canal" <mcanal@igalia.com>,
"Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Daniel Diaz" <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>,
"David Gow" <davidgow@google.com>,
"Arthur Grillo" <arthurgrillo@riseup.net>,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"Naresh Kamboju" <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"Linux Kernel Functional Testing" <lkft@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 08:40:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7663e19-74d5-478d-becc-0a080075e7d6@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240327193920.GV403975@kernel.org>
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 07:39:20PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
[ ... ]
> > >
> > > Hi Guenter,
> > >
> > > a minor nit from my side: this change results in a Kernel doc warning.
> > >
> > > .../bug.h:29: warning: expecting prototype for _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY(). Prototype was for HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION() instead
> > >
> > > Perhaps either the new code should be placed above the Kernel doc,
> > > or scripts/kernel-doc should be enhanced?
> > >
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the feedback.
> >
> > The definition block needs to be inside CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE,
> > so it would be a bit odd to move it above the documentation
> > just to make kerneldoc happy. I am not really sure that to do
> > about it.
>
> FWIIW, I agree that would be odd.
> But perhaps the #ifdef could also move above the Kernel doc?
> Maybe not a great idea, but the best one I've had so far.
>
I did that for the next version of the patch series. It is a bit more
clumsy, so I left it as separate patch on top of this patch. I'd
still like to get input from others before making the change final.
Thanks,
Guenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Maíra Canal" <mcanal@igalia.com>,
"Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Daniel Diaz" <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>,
"David Gow" <davidgow@google.com>,
"Arthur Grillo" <arthurgrillo@riseup.net>,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"Naresh Kamboju" <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"Linux Kernel Functional Testing" <lkft@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 08:40:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7663e19-74d5-478d-becc-0a080075e7d6@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240327193920.GV403975@kernel.org>
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 07:39:20PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
[ ... ]
> > >
> > > Hi Guenter,
> > >
> > > a minor nit from my side: this change results in a Kernel doc warning.
> > >
> > > .../bug.h:29: warning: expecting prototype for _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY(). Prototype was for HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION() instead
> > >
> > > Perhaps either the new code should be placed above the Kernel doc,
> > > or scripts/kernel-doc should be enhanced?
> > >
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the feedback.
> >
> > The definition block needs to be inside CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE,
> > so it would be a bit odd to move it above the documentation
> > just to make kerneldoc happy. I am not really sure that to do
> > about it.
>
> FWIIW, I agree that would be odd.
> But perhaps the #ifdef could also move above the Kernel doc?
> Maybe not a great idea, but the best one I've had so far.
>
I did that for the next version of the patch series. It is a bit more
clumsy, so I left it as separate patch on top of this patch. I'd
still like to get input from others before making the change final.
Thanks,
Guenter
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Maíra Canal" <mcanal@igalia.com>,
"Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Daniel Diaz" <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>,
"David Gow" <davidgow@google.com>,
"Arthur Grillo" <arthurgrillo@riseup.net>,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"Naresh Kamboju" <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
"Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"Linux Kernel Functional Testing" <lkft@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 08:40:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7663e19-74d5-478d-becc-0a080075e7d6@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240327193920.GV403975@kernel.org>
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 07:39:20PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
[ ... ]
> > >
> > > Hi Guenter,
> > >
> > > a minor nit from my side: this change results in a Kernel doc warning.
> > >
> > > .../bug.h:29: warning: expecting prototype for _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY(). Prototype was for HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION() instead
> > >
> > > Perhaps either the new code should be placed above the Kernel doc,
> > > or scripts/kernel-doc should be enhanced?
> > >
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the feedback.
> >
> > The definition block needs to be inside CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE,
> > so it would be a bit odd to move it above the documentation
> > just to make kerneldoc happy. I am not really sure that to do
> > about it.
>
> FWIIW, I agree that would be odd.
> But perhaps the #ifdef could also move above the Kernel doc?
> Maybe not a great idea, but the best one I've had so far.
>
I did that for the next version of the patch series. It is a bit more
clumsy, so I left it as separate patch on top of this patch. I'd
still like to get input from others before making the change final.
Thanks,
Guenter
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Cc: loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
"Brendan Higgins" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Arthur Grillo" <arthurgrillo@riseup.net>,
"Ville Syrjälä" <ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
"Daniel Diaz" <daniel.diaz@linaro.org>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
"Naresh Kamboju" <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
"Maíra Canal" <mcanal@igalia.com>,
"Dan Carpenter" <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
"Linux Kernel Functional Testing" <lkft@linaro.org>,
"Kees Cook" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>,
"Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
"Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
"David Gow" <davidgow@google.com>,
"Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 08:40:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d7663e19-74d5-478d-becc-0a080075e7d6@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240327193920.GV403975@kernel.org>
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 07:39:20PM +0000, Simon Horman wrote:
[ ... ]
> > >
> > > Hi Guenter,
> > >
> > > a minor nit from my side: this change results in a Kernel doc warning.
> > >
> > > .../bug.h:29: warning: expecting prototype for _EMIT_BUG_ENTRY(). Prototype was for HAVE_BUG_FUNCTION() instead
> > >
> > > Perhaps either the new code should be placed above the Kernel doc,
> > > or scripts/kernel-doc should be enhanced?
> > >
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the feedback.
> >
> > The definition block needs to be inside CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE,
> > so it would be a bit odd to move it above the documentation
> > just to make kerneldoc happy. I am not really sure that to do
> > about it.
>
> FWIIW, I agree that would be odd.
> But perhaps the #ifdef could also move above the Kernel doc?
> Maybe not a great idea, but the best one I've had so far.
>
I did that for the next version of the patch series. It is a bit more
clumsy, so I left it as separate patch on top of this patch. I'd
still like to get input from others before making the change final.
Thanks,
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-29 15:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-25 17:52 [PATCH v2 00/14] Add support for suppressing warning backtraces Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 01/14] bug/kunit: Core " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 02/14] kunit: bug: Count suppressed " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 03/14] kunit: Add test cases for backtrace warning suppression Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 04/14] kunit: Add documentation for warning backtrace suppression API Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 05/14] drm: Suppress intentional warning backtraces in scaling unit tests Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 19:05 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-25 19:05 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-25 19:05 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-25 19:05 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-25 19:24 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 19:24 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 19:24 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 19:24 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-26 1:09 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-26 1:09 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-26 1:09 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-26 1:09 ` Maíra Canal
2024-03-26 5:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-26 5:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-26 5:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-26 5:02 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 06/14] net: kunit: Suppress lock warning noise at end of dev_addr_lists tests Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 07/14] x86: Add support for suppressing warning backtraces Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 08/14] arm64: " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 09/14] loongarch: " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 10/14] parisc: " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 11/14] s390: " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 12/14] sh: " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-27 14:44 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-27 14:44 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-27 14:44 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-27 14:44 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-27 15:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-27 15:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-27 15:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-27 15:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-27 19:39 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-27 19:39 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-27 19:39 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-27 19:39 ` Simon Horman
2024-03-29 15:40 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2024-03-29 15:40 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-29 15:40 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-29 15:40 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 13/14] riscv: " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` [PATCH v2 14/14] powerpc: " Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-03-25 17:52 ` Guenter Roeck
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d7663e19-74d5-478d-becc-0a080075e7d6@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=arthurgrillo@riseup.net \
--cc=brendan.higgins@linux.dev \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel.diaz@linaro.org \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=davidgow@google.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kunit-dev@googlegroups.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=lkft@linaro.org \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com \
--cc=mcanal@igalia.com \
--cc=mripard@kernel.org \
--cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tzimmermann@suse.de \
--cc=ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.