On 5/19/2021 6:59 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 19/05/2021 19:47, Ferruh Yigit:
>> On 5/19/2021 6:33 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> The Doxygen comments are placed before the related lines,
>>> but the markers were /**< instead of /**
>>>
>>> The struct rte_flow_item_integrity did not appear in Doxygen output
>>> because there was no general comment for the struct.
>>>
>>> Fixes: b10a421a1f3b ("ethdev: add packet integrity check flow rules")
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>
>>> Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>
>>> Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khapa...@broadcom.com>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
>>
>>
>> btw, there are some related issues for other structs, do you think should we
>> fix
>> them in this release?
>>
>> Following are missing doxygen comment for its item:
>> * "struct rte_flow_item_conntrack"
>> * "struct rte_flow_item_ecpri"
>>
>> * Following are missing doxygen comments for its items, and missing
>> experimental
>> tag.
>> * "struct rte_flow_item_geneve_opt"
>> * "struct rte_flow_item_ipv6_frag_ext"
>>
>> And I suspect we can see similar issues with more structs as we check them
>> all.
>
> Except GENEVE, they are singleton (one member in the struct),
> so it is not a big deal.
> Given they are missing comment (not wrong), I propose to wait the next release
> for making rte_flow doxygen more complete.
> I plan to have a look at the rst doc as well.
>
>
OK
