lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: linux-next: build warning after merge of the pinctrl tree
Hi all,

On Fri, 18 Mar 2022 18:31:01 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2022 14:25:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 08:03:31 +0100 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Em Wed, 27 Oct 2021 12:10:45 +0100
> > > Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> escreveu:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 12:01:18 +0100, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > After merging the pinctrl tree, today's linux-next build (htmldocs)
> > > > > produced this warning:
> > > > >
> > > > > include/linux/gpio/driver.h:284: warning: Function parameter or member 'parent_handler_data_array' not described in 'gpio_irq_chip'
> > > > >
> > > > > Introduced by commit
> > > > >
> > > > > cfe6807d82e9 ("gpio: Allow per-parent interrupt data")
> > > > >
> > > > > But may actually be a problem with the tool :-(
> > > >
> > > > I guess the tool doesn't like having two fields that are part of a
> > > > union documented together... Happy to tweak it if someone tells me how
> > > > this should be written.
> > >
> > > Yes, that's the case. See, when you do:
> > >
> > > /**
> > > * @parent_handler_data:
> > > * @parent_handler_data_array:
> > > *
> > > * Data associated, and passed to, the handler for the parent
> > > * interrupt. Can either be a single pointer if @per_parent_data
> > > * is false, or an array of @num_parents pointers otherwise. If
> > > * @per_parent_data is true, @parent_handler_data_array cannot be
> > > * NULL.
> > > */
> > > union {
> > > void *parent_handler_data;
> > > void **parent_handler_data_array;
> > > };
> > >
> > > The tool will understand it as an undocumented "parent_handler_data" and
> > > a documented "parent_handler_data_array".
> > >
> > > It has to do that, as otherwise it won't get cases where people just adds a
> > > @foo: as a template but actually forgets to fill it.
> > >
> > > The solution would be to add a description for both, e. g. something
> > > similar to:
> > >
> > > /**
> > > * @parent_handler_data:
> > > *
> > > * If @per_parent_data is false, contains a single pointer
> > > * with the data associated, and passed to, the handler for the
> > > * parent interrupt.
> > > *
> > > * @parent_handler_data_array:
> > > *
> > > * If @per_parent_data is true, it should contain an array of
> > > * @num_parents pointers with the data associated, and passed to,
> > > * the handler for the parent interrupt. Cannot be NULL.
> > > */
> >
> > I am still getting this warning.
>
> I am still getting this warning.

I am still getting this warning.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-06 01:34    [W:0.376 / U:1.548 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site