"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilb...@redhat.com> wrote: > * Juan Quintela (quint...@redhat.com) wrote: >> Added doc comments for existing functions comment and rewrite them in >> a common style. >> >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> >> --- >> migration/ram.c | 348 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- >> 1 file changed, 227 insertions(+), 121 deletions(-) >>
>> * >> * If this is the 1st block, it also writes the block identification >> * >> - * Returns: Number of bytes written >> + * Returns the number of bytes written > > Do the doc tools recognise that to pick up the explanation > for the return value? No clue. Following qemu/include/exec/memory.h >> @@ -459,8 +474,8 @@ static void xbzrle_cache_zero_page(ram_addr_t >> current_addr) >> * -1 means that xbzrle would be longer than normal >> * >> * @f: QEMUFile where to send the data >> - * @current_data: >> - * @current_addr: >> + * @current_data: contents of the page > > That's wrong. The point of current_data is that it gets updated by this > function to point to the cache page whenever the data ends up in the cache. > It's important then that the caller uses that pointer to save the data to > disk/network rather than the original pointer, since the data that's saved > must exactly match the cache contents even if the guest is still writing to > it. this is the current text: * @current_data: pointer to the address of the page contents This was Peter suggestion. Rest of suggestions included. Thanks, Juan.
