Re: [PATCH 02/13] cpufreq: cpufreq: Demote lots of function headers unworthy of kerneldoc status

On Wed, 15 Jul 2020, Viresh Kumar wrote:

On 14-07-20, 15:50, Lee Jones wrote:

quoted

-/**
+/*
  * cpufreq_remove_dev - remove a CPU device

Because cpufreq_add_dev() is part of kernel doc, we better keep it.

quoted

  *
  * Removes the cpufreq interface for a CPU device.

@@ -2373,6 +2374,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_unregister_governor);
  * cpufreq_get_policy - get the current cpufreq_policy
  * @policy: struct cpufreq_policy into which the current cpufreq_policy
  *	is written
+ * @cpu: CPU to find the policy for
  *
  * Reads the current cpufreq policy.
  */

@@ -2759,7 +2761,7 @@ int cpufreq_register_driver(struct cpufreq_driver *driver_data)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cpufreq_register_driver);
 
-/**
+/*
  * cpufreq_unregister_driver - unregister the current CPUFreq driver

And this should be there for sure.

Where is the *.rst file that references this kerneldoc entry?

Also, what do you mean by "there"?  We're not removing the function
header.  It's still documented, it's just not kerneldoc.

quoted

  *
  * Unregister the current CPUFreq driver. Only call this if you have

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel