Em Tue, 20 Sep 2016 13:00:33 -0600 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> escreveu: > On Tue, 20 Sep 2016 20:56:35 +0200 > Markus Heiser <markus.heiser@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I submitted one patch fixing it. Not sure if it got merged by Jon > > > or not. > > > > Ups, I might have overseen this patch .. as Jon said, its hard to > > follow you ;) > > > > I tested the above with Jon's docs-next, so it seems your patch is > > not yet applied. Could you send me a link for this patch? (sorry, > > I can't find it). > > Send again, please? I'll add it to the pile of other stuff, and try not > to lose it again...:) Gah, there are so many patches that I'm also confused whether I sent something or just dreamed about sending it :) I actually sent a patch doing this on a /47 patch series, but only for macros: Subject: [PATCH 01/47] kernel-doc: ignore arguments on macro definitions I was thinking on doing the same for functions, but didn't actually submitted such patch. Yet, it seems more coherent, IMHO, to use use same approach for both C functions and macros: presenting just the name instead of printing the arguments. I'll work on it and submit, likely tomorrow. Thanks, Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
