On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 10:40:09AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 06:33:36PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > The documented typedef just after the kernel-doc markup > > is named "refcount_struct". > > > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > include/linux/refcount.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/refcount.h b/include/linux/refcount.h > > index 497990c69b0b..8f431b0e69e4 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/refcount.h > > +++ b/include/linux/refcount.h > > @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ > > struct mutex; > > > > /** > > - * struct refcount_t - variant of atomic_t specialized for reference counts > > + * struct refcount_struct - variant of atomic_t specialized for reference counts > > Hm, this is a weird one. Yes, it's actually "struct refcount_struct", > but the usage should be refcount_t (through the typedef). I'm not sure > what the right way to document this is. Yeah, this is wrong. If this is due to a kernel doc warning, the kernel doc machinery is wrong *again*.
