[Intel-gfx] [PATCH 01/19] drm/i915/i915_scatterlist: Fix kerneldoc formatting issue - missing '@'

[Lee Jones]

On Wed, 05 Apr 2023, Jani Nikula wrote:

> On Wed, 05 Apr 2023, Lee Jones <lee at kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 04 Apr 2023, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 03 Apr 2023, Lee Jones <lee at kernel.org> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 03 Apr 2023, Jani Nikula wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Fri, 31 Mar 2023, Lee Jones <lee at kernel.org> wrote:
> >> >> > Fixes the following W=1 kernel build warning(s):
> >> >> >
> >> >> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_scatterlist.c:62: warning: Function parameter or member 'size' not described in 'i915_refct_sgt_init'
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula at linux.intel.com>
> >> >> > Cc: Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen at linux.intel.com>
> >> >> > Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
> >> >> > Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin at linux.intel.com>
> >> >> > Cc: David Airlie <airlied at gmail.com>
> >> >> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch>
> >> >> > Cc: intel-gfx at lists.freedesktop.org
> >> >> > Cc: dri-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee at kernel.org>
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks for the patches!
> >> >>
> >> >> Applied all but one of the drm/i915 patches to drm-intel-next or
> >> >> drm-intel-gt-next depending on the area. There were a couple of issues
> >> >> that I fixed while applying. There was a conflict with patch 5/19
> >> >> against drm-intel-gt-next so I left that one out.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks Jani.  I'll rebase and see what's left.
> >>
> >> We also took notice and aim to track this more aggressively [1].
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > I did clean-up all of the GPU warnings already a couple of years ago,
> > but they seem to have crept back over time.  It would be great if we
> > could put some extra checks in place to prevent them in the future.
>
> We are pretty zealous about warnings in general in i915. We have a bunch
> of extra warnings in our local Makefile and use -Werror in
> development. Inspired by this series, we added kernel-doc check to the
> build, and hope to add kernel-doc -Werror too once we're done.

Sounds good that you're on it.  At least in your part of GPU.

kernel-doc warnings are surfaced by enabling W=1.

> > My aim, albeit ambitious, is to clean-up all of the W=1 warnings in the
> > kernel, then have them promoted to W=0, so they warn more loudly during
> > development, thus keeping them from reappearing.
>
> I wish it was easier to do the equivalent of W=1 on a driver or Makefile
> basis. I like to keep i915 clean, but I don't like to use W=1 because
> there are just so many warnings currently.

Well that's what I hope to improve (again). :)

> The other alternative is fixing and moving extra warnings from W=1 to
> W=0 one by one.

Right, that's where I'd like to end up eventually.

--
Lee Jones [李琼斯]