On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 06:57:46PM -0700, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2016, David Gibson wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 09:56:19PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > +/**
> > > + * fdt_for_each_property - iterate over all properties of a node
> > > + * @property_offset: property offset (int)
> > > + * @fdt: FDT blob (const void *)
> > > + * @node: node offset (int)
> > > + *
> > > + * This is actually a wrapper around a for loop and would be used like so:
> > > + *
> > > + * fdt_for_each_property(fdt, node, property) {
> >
> > Again, parameter order is out of date.
>
> also, when did kerneldoc content start specifying data types in the
> comment? (int, const void*, ...). i don't think that's standard.
It's not, but because this is a macro, not a function, I think it's a
good idea to include. The data types are constrained by the functions
the macro invokes, but unlike a function comment those aren't obvious
from the function signature immediately below.
Actually.. rather than the somewhat longwinded comment about @node, it
might be worth just noting that it's an lvalue in the parameter
description here.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
