On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 01:29:46PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, Sep 27 2021, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 9/27/21 12:18, Cornelia Huck wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 06 2021, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Reported-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com> > >>> Suggested-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com> > >>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> > >>> --- > >>> include/hw/virtio/virtio.h | 7 +++++++ > >>> hw/virtio/virtio.c | 1 + > >>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h > >>> index 8bab9cfb750..c1c5f6e53c8 100644 > >>> --- a/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h > >>> +++ b/include/hw/virtio/virtio.h > >>> @@ -186,6 +186,13 @@ void virtio_delete_queue(VirtQueue *vq); > >>> > >>> void virtqueue_push(VirtQueue *vq, const VirtQueueElement *elem, > >>> unsigned int len); > >>> +/** > >>> + * virtqueue_flush: > >>> + * @vq: The #VirtQueue > >>> + * @count: Number of elements to flush > >>> + * > >>> + * Must be called within RCU critical section. > >>> + */ > >> > >> Hm... do these doc comments belong into .h files, or rather into .c files? > > > > Maybe we should restart this old thread, vote(?) and settle on a style? > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/349cd87b-0526-30b8-d9cd-0eee537ab...@redhat.com/ > > My vote would still go to putting this into .c files :) Not sure if we > want to go through the hassle of a wholesale cleanup; but if others > agree, we could at least start with putting new doc comments next to the > implementation.
In the virtio.c/h case doc comments (and especially the RCU-related ones) are in the .c file. The exception is that constants and structs are documented in the header file. I would follow that and avoid duplicating doc comments into the .h file. Stefan
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
