[PATCH 3/8] backlight: ili922x: Add missing kerneldoc descriptions for CHECK_FREQ_REG() args

[Daniel Thompson]

On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:33:34AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 03:57:16PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > Kerneldoc syntax is used, but not complete.  Descriptions required.
> > > 
> > > Prevents warnings like:
> > > 
> > >  drivers/video/backlight/ili922x.c:116: warning: Function parameter or member 's' not described in 'CHECK_FREQ_REG'
> > >  drivers/video/backlight/ili922x.c:116: warning: Function parameter or member 'x' not described in 'CHECK_FREQ_REG'
> > > 
> > > Cc: <stable at vger.kernel.org>
> > > Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie at samsung.com>
> > > Cc: Software Engineering <sbabic at denx.de>
> > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones at linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/video/backlight/ili922x.c | 2 ++
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/video/backlight/ili922x.c b/drivers/video/backlight/ili922x.c
> > > index 9c5aa3fbb2842..8cb4b9d3c3bba 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/video/backlight/ili922x.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/video/backlight/ili922x.c
> > > @@ -107,6 +107,8 @@
> > >   *	lower frequency when the registers are read/written.
> > >   *	The macro sets the frequency in the spi_transfer structure if
> > >   *	the frequency exceeds the maximum value.
> > > + * @s: pointer to controller side proxy for an SPI slave device
> > 
> > What's wrong with "a pointer to an SPI device"?
> > 
> > I am aware, having looked it up to find out what the above actually
> > means, that this is how struct spi_device is described in its own kernel
> > doc but quoting at that level of detail of both overkill and confusing.
> 
> I figured that using the official description would be better than
> making something up.  However if you think it's better to KISS, then I
> can change it.

Yes, I'd strongly prefer KISS here.

I know it is an "I am the world" argument[1] but I found using such a
dogmatically accurate description out of context to be very confusing
and therefore I don't think such a comment improves readability.


Daniel.


[1]: See #3 from http://www.leany.com/logic/Adams.html