[PATCH] staging: wlan-ng: add comment to spinlock_t

Dalvin-Ehinoma Noah Aiguobas posted 1 patch 2 years, 8 months ago
drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
[PATCH] staging: wlan-ng: add comment to spinlock_t
Posted by Dalvin-Ehinoma Noah Aiguobas 2 years, 8 months ago
Fix checkpatch.pl warning: spinlock_t definition without comment in
drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h

Signed-off-by: Dalvin-Ehinoma Noah Aiguobas <pharcodra@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
index e33dd1b9c40e..fc6d67cec5b1 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
+++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
@@ -1000,7 +1000,7 @@ struct hfa384x_usbctlx {
 };
 
 struct hfa384x_usbctlxq {
-	spinlock_t lock;
+	spinlock_t lock;	/* disable interrupts while working in hfa384 or hfa384x_usbctlx */
 	struct list_head pending;
 	struct list_head active;
 	struct list_head completing;
-- 
2.25.1
Re: [PATCH] staging: wlan-ng: add comment to spinlock_t
Posted by Greg KH 2 years, 8 months ago
On Sun, Apr 02, 2023 at 05:32:44PM +0200, Dalvin-Ehinoma Noah Aiguobas wrote:
> Fix checkpatch.pl warning: spinlock_t definition without comment in
> drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dalvin-Ehinoma Noah Aiguobas <pharcodra@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> index e33dd1b9c40e..fc6d67cec5b1 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/wlan-ng/hfa384x.h
> @@ -1000,7 +1000,7 @@ struct hfa384x_usbctlx {
>  };
>  
>  struct hfa384x_usbctlxq {
> -	spinlock_t lock;
> +	spinlock_t lock;	/* disable interrupts while working in hfa384 or hfa384x_usbctlx */

Disable interrupts?  Are you sure that is what this lock is doing?
And what exactly does "while working in..." mean?

Why not just write real kernel doc for all of the fields in this
structure?

thanks,

greg k-h