| Message ID | 20220403232902.1753-1-rdunlap@infradead.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm/format_helper: fix a kernel-doc typo | expand |
Reviewed-by: Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>
Hello Randy, On 4/4/22 01:29, Randy Dunlap wrote: > It looks like the incorrect name of a function parameter was used > in the kernel-doc notation, so just change it to the function's > parameter name to quell the kernel-doc warning. > > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c:640: warning: Function parameter or member 'vaddr' not described in 'drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_mono_reversed' > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c:640: warning: Excess function parameter 'src' description in 'drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_mono_reversed' > > Fixes: bcf8b616deb8 ("drm/format-helper: Add drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_mono_reversed()") > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> > Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com> > Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> > CC: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> > CC: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > Thanks for the patch. Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions).
Hi Simon, On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: > Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they > wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see > https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. thanks.
On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: > > > Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they > > wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see > > https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). > > That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any > problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h I changed these to: --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand from scratch.
On 4/5/22 08:12, Simon Ser wrote: > On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > >> On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: >> >>> Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they >>> wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see >>> https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). >> >> That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any >> problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. > > Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was > generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: > > --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h > +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h > > I changed these to: > > --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h > +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h > > This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand > from scratch. > Yes, I believe the suggestion should be to use git-format-patch instead. To make sure that was is posted can be consumed by the git-am command.
On 4/4/22 23:26, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > On 4/5/22 08:12, Simon Ser wrote: >> On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: >> >>> On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: >>> >>>> Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they >>>> wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see >>>> https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). >>> >>> That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any >>> problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. >> >> Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was >> generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: >> >> --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h >> +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h >> >> I changed these to: >> >> --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h >> +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h >> >> This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand >> from scratch. >> > > Yes, I believe the suggestion should be to use git-format-patch instead. > > To make sure that was is posted can be consumed by the git-am command. Considering that I am not using git, I think it will be difficult to use git-format-patch. (git-send-email is independent of git.) Still, this is the first time in many years that I have heard of this problem. Thanks for the info and insights.
On Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 at 16:39, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > On 4/4/22 23:26, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > > > On 4/5/22 08:12, Simon Ser wrote: > > > > > On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap rdunlap@infradead.org wrote: > > > > > > > On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: > > > > > > > > > Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they > > > > > wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see > > > > > https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). > > > > > > > > That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any > > > > problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. > > > > > > Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was > > > generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: > > > > > > --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > > > > I changed these to: > > > > > > --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > > > > This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand > > > from scratch. > > > > Yes, I believe the suggestion should be to use git-format-patch instead. > > > > To make sure that was is posted can be consumed by the git-am command. > > > Considering that I am not using git, I think it will be difficult > to use git-format-patch. Ah, okay. Would you consider using Git for you next patches? (FYI, I'll pass next time I hit a patch which doesn't apply cleanly. Nothing personal, it's just that I don't have time to deal with broken patches.)
Hi Simon, On 4/5/22 08:05, Simon Ser wrote: > On Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 at 16:39, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > >> On 4/4/22 23:26, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> >>> On 4/5/22 08:12, Simon Ser wrote: >>> >>>> On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap rdunlap@infradead.org wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they >>>>>> wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see >>>>>> https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). >>>>> >>>>> That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any >>>>> problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. >>>> >>>> Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was >>>> generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: >>>> >>>> --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h >>>> +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h >>>> >>>> I changed these to: >>>> >>>> --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h >>>> +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h quilt (which I am using) can generate a/ b/ patches instead of linux.orig/ and linux/ patches. >>>> This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand >>>> from scratch. I would like more information about this one if it's not too much trouble for you. >>> Yes, I believe the suggestion should be to use git-format-patch instead. >>> >>> To make sure that was is posted can be consumed by the git-am command. >> >> >> Considering that I am not using git, I think it will be difficult >> to use git-format-patch. > > Ah, okay. Would you consider using Git for you next patches? Don't know. It's quite a big hurdle to jump over IMO. > (FYI, I'll pass next time I hit a patch which doesn't apply cleanly. > Nothing personal, it's just that I don't have time to deal with broken > patches.) Yeah, I get it. thanks.
On Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 at 19:58, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > On 4/5/22 08:05, Simon Ser wrote: > > > On Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 at 16:39, Randy Dunlap rdunlap@infradead.org wrote: > > > > > On 4/4/22 23:26, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > > > > > > > On 4/5/22 08:12, Simon Ser wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap rdunlap@infradead.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they > > > > > > > wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see > > > > > > > https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). > > > > > > > > > > > > That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any > > > > > > problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. > > > > > > > > > > Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was > > > > > generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: > > > > > > > > > > --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > > > +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > > > > > > > > I changed these to: > > > > > > > > > > --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > > > +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h > > > quilt (which I am using) can generate a/ b/ patches instead of linux.orig/ and > linux/ patches. > > > > > > This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand > > > > > from scratch. > > > I would like more information about this one if it's not too much trouble > for you. IIRC it was the usual git-am error "fatal: sha1 information is lacking or useless". Maybe you wrote the patch for an old tree and drm-misc-next contained changes near the lines you changed? Maybe providing base-commit information in the patch would've helped? I'm not sure.
On 4/5/22 11:47, Simon Ser wrote: > On Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 at 19:58, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> wrote: > >> On 4/5/22 08:05, Simon Ser wrote: >> >>> On Tuesday, April 5th, 2022 at 16:39, Randy Dunlap rdunlap@infradead.org wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/4/22 23:26, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 4/5/22 08:12, Simon Ser wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Monday, April 4th, 2022 at 23:35, Randy Dunlap rdunlap@infradead.org wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 4/4/22 09:04, Simon Ser wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Both doc patches pushed, thanks. I had to manually edit them because they >>>>>>>> wouldn't apply cleanly. Next time, please use git-send-email (see >>>>>>>> https://git-send-email.io/ for setup instructions). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's odd. I did use 'git send-email' and I don't usually have any >>>>>>> problems (AFAIK). I'll check those setup instructions. >>>>>> >>>>>> Hm, maybe the issue isn't git-send-email, but the way the patch was >>>>>> generated? I had to manually edit these lines for the first patch to work: >>>>>> >>>>>> --- linux-next-20211217.orig/include/drm/drm_file.h >>>>>> +++ linux-next-20211217/include/drm/drm_file.h >>>>>> >>>>>> I changed these to: >>>>>> >>>>>> --- a/include/drm/drm_file.h >>>>>> +++ b/include/drm/drm_file.h >> >> >> quilt (which I am using) can generate a/ b/ patches instead of linux.orig/ and >> linux/ patches. >> >>>>>> This wasn't enough for the second patch, I had to re-do the changes by hand >>>>>> from scratch. >> >> >> I would like more information about this one if it's not too much trouble >> for you. > > IIRC it was the usual git-am error "fatal: sha1 information is lacking > or useless". Maybe you wrote the patch for an old tree and drm-misc-next > contained changes near the lines you changed? Maybe providing base-commit > information in the patch would've helped? I'm not sure. OK, thanks Simon.
--- linux-next-20220401.orig/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c +++ linux-next-20220401/drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c @@ -624,7 +624,7 @@ static void drm_fb_gray8_to_mono_reverse * drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_mono_reversed - Convert XRGB8888 to reversed monochrome * @dst: reversed monochrome destination buffer * @dst_pitch: Number of bytes between two consecutive scanlines within dst - * @src: XRGB8888 source buffer + * @vaddr: XRGB8888 source buffer * @fb: DRM framebuffer * @clip: Clip rectangle area to copy *
It looks like the incorrect name of a function parameter was used in the kernel-doc notation, so just change it to the function's parameter name to quell the kernel-doc warning. drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c:640: warning: Function parameter or member 'vaddr' not described in 'drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_mono_reversed' drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c:640: warning: Excess function parameter 'src' description in 'drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_mono_reversed' Fixes: bcf8b616deb8 ("drm/format-helper: Add drm_fb_xrgb8888_to_mono_reversed()") Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> CC: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org> CC: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de> --- drivers/gpu/drm/drm_format_helper.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)