[PATCH 3/7] drm/doc: Add GEM/CMA helpers to kerneldoc

[Thierry Reding]

On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 04:04:55PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 04:01:26PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 03:34:40PM +0100, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 02:25:15PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > > + * Return: A struct drm_gem_cma_object * on success or an ERR_PTR()-encoded
> > > 
> > > Same bikeshed about "Returns:\n" as with the panel kerneldoc patch.
> > 
> > I've been following the style described in the kernel-doc nano-HOWTO,
> > which says that:
> > 
> > 	The return value, if any, should be described in a dedicated
> > 	section named "Return".
> > 
> > There are other things in that document that we don't follow in DRM, so
> > I wonder if we should just consider it as guidelines rather than actual
> > rules (they aren't enforced anyway) or perhaps make a pass over existing
> > kerneldoc and convert it to the rules described in that document.
> > 
> > That document is the only reference for the kerneldoc syntax (that I
> > know of), so I had always thought that we should be following it.
> 
> We've started out with all-uppercase RETURNS from userspace libdrm iirc. I
> don't care really, but iirc the Returns: is the common one we use. Imo it
> also reads better in English, but not native speaker here ;-)

Alright, I'll go with the variant that you proposed for the sake of
consistency.

Thierry
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/attachments/20141105/fd7d4352/attachment.sig>