diff mbox series

ethdev: fix comments of packet integrity flow item

Message ID 20210519162725.2179226-1-thomas@monjalon.net (mailing list archive)
State Superseded, archived
Headers
Series ethdev: fix comments of packet integrity flow item |

Checks

Context Check Description
ci/checkpatch success coding style OK
ci/iol-abi-testing success Testing PASS
ci/Intel-compilation success Compilation OK
ci/iol-testing fail Testing issues
ci/intel-Testing success Testing PASS
ci/iol-mellanox-Functional fail Functional Testing issues
ci/iol-mellanox-Performance fail Performance Testing issues
ci/iol-intel-Performance success Performance Testing PASS

Commit Message

Thomas Monjalon May 19, 2021, 4:27 p.m. UTC 
  The Doxygen comments are placed before the related lines,
but the markers were /**< instead of /**

Fixes: b10a421a1f3b ("ethdev: add packet integrity check flow rules")

Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
---
 lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h | 18 +++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

Comments

Andrew Rybchenko May 19, 2021, 4:30 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 5/19/21 7:27 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> The Doxygen comments are placed before the related lines,
> but the markers were /**< instead of /**
> 
> Fixes: b10a421a1f3b ("ethdev: add packet integrity check flow rules")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>

Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
Ajit Khaparde May 19, 2021, 4:31 p.m. UTC | #2 
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 9:30 AM Andrew Rybchenko <
andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru> wrote:

> On 5/19/21 7:27 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > The Doxygen comments are placed before the related lines,
> > but the markers were /**< instead of /**
> >
> > Fixes: b10a421a1f3b ("ethdev: add packet integrity check flow rules")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>
> Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>
Acked-by: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
Ferruh Yigit May 19, 2021, 4:53 p.m. UTC | #3 
On 5/19/2021 5:27 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> The Doxygen comments are placed before the related lines,
> but the markers were /**< instead of /**
> 
> Fixes: b10a421a1f3b ("ethdev: add packet integrity check flow rules")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> ---
>  lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h | 18 +++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> index 94c8c1ccc8..d7e0082dc7 100644
> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> @@ -1708,7 +1708,7 @@ rte_flow_item_geneve_opt_mask = {
>  #endif
>  
>  struct rte_flow_item_integrity {
> -	/**< Tunnel encapsulation level the item should apply to.
> +	/** Tunnel encapsulation level the item should apply to.
>  	 * @see rte_flow_action_rss
>  	 */
>  	uint32_t level;
> @@ -1716,21 +1716,21 @@ struct rte_flow_item_integrity {
>  	union {
>  		__extension__
>  		struct {
> -			/**< The packet is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> +			/** The packet is valid after passing all HW checks. */
>  			uint64_t packet_ok:1;
> -			/**< L2 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> +			/** L2 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
>  			uint64_t l2_ok:1;
> -			/**< L3 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> +			/** L3 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
>  			uint64_t l3_ok:1;
> -			/**< L4 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> +			/** L4 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
>  			uint64_t l4_ok:1;
> -			/**< L2 layer CRC is valid. */
> +			/** L2 layer CRC is valid. */
>  			uint64_t l2_crc_ok:1;
> -			/**< IPv4 layer checksum is valid. */
> +			/** IPv4 layer checksum is valid. */
>  			uint64_t ipv4_csum_ok:1;
> -			/**< L4 layer checksum is valid. */
> +			/** L4 layer checksum is valid. */
>  			uint64_t l4_csum_ok:1;
> -			/**< The l3 length is smaller than the frame length. */
> +			/** L3 length is smaller than frame length. */
>  			uint64_t l3_len_ok:1;
>  			uint64_t reserved:56;
>  		};
> 

+1 to fix but the struct is not listed at all in the API documentation, because
it is missing Doxygen comment for the struct itself.

Can it be possible to add a doxygen comment for the struct, even it is very
basic, to enable it to be documented?
Thomas Monjalon May 19, 2021, 5:23 p.m. UTC | #4 
19/05/2021 18:53, Ferruh Yigit:
> On 5/19/2021 5:27 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > The Doxygen comments are placed before the related lines,
> > but the markers were /**< instead of /**
> > 
> > Fixes: b10a421a1f3b ("ethdev: add packet integrity check flow rules")
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > ---
> >  lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h | 18 +++++++++---------
> >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> > index 94c8c1ccc8..d7e0082dc7 100644
> > --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> > +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
> > @@ -1708,7 +1708,7 @@ rte_flow_item_geneve_opt_mask = {
> >  #endif
> >  
> >  struct rte_flow_item_integrity {
> > -	/**< Tunnel encapsulation level the item should apply to.
> > +	/** Tunnel encapsulation level the item should apply to.
> >  	 * @see rte_flow_action_rss
> >  	 */
> >  	uint32_t level;
> > @@ -1716,21 +1716,21 @@ struct rte_flow_item_integrity {
> >  	union {
> >  		__extension__
> >  		struct {
> > -			/**< The packet is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> > +			/** The packet is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> >  			uint64_t packet_ok:1;
> > -			/**< L2 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> > +			/** L2 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> >  			uint64_t l2_ok:1;
> > -			/**< L3 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> > +			/** L3 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> >  			uint64_t l3_ok:1;
> > -			/**< L4 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> > +			/** L4 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
> >  			uint64_t l4_ok:1;
> > -			/**< L2 layer CRC is valid. */
> > +			/** L2 layer CRC is valid. */
> >  			uint64_t l2_crc_ok:1;
> > -			/**< IPv4 layer checksum is valid. */
> > +			/** IPv4 layer checksum is valid. */
> >  			uint64_t ipv4_csum_ok:1;
> > -			/**< L4 layer checksum is valid. */
> > +			/** L4 layer checksum is valid. */
> >  			uint64_t l4_csum_ok:1;
> > -			/**< The l3 length is smaller than the frame length. */
> > +			/** L3 length is smaller than frame length. */
> >  			uint64_t l3_len_ok:1;
> >  			uint64_t reserved:56;
> >  		};
> > 
> 
> +1 to fix but the struct is not listed at all in the API documentation, because
> it is missing Doxygen comment for the struct itself.
> 
> Can it be possible to add a doxygen comment for the struct, even it is very
> basic, to enable it to be documented?

Yes OK
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
index 94c8c1ccc8..d7e0082dc7 100644
--- a/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
+++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_flow.h
@@ -1708,7 +1708,7 @@  rte_flow_item_geneve_opt_mask = {
 #endif
 
 struct rte_flow_item_integrity {
-	/**< Tunnel encapsulation level the item should apply to.
+	/** Tunnel encapsulation level the item should apply to.
 	 * @see rte_flow_action_rss
 	 */
 	uint32_t level;
@@ -1716,21 +1716,21 @@  struct rte_flow_item_integrity {
 	union {
 		__extension__
 		struct {
-			/**< The packet is valid after passing all HW checks. */
+			/** The packet is valid after passing all HW checks. */
 			uint64_t packet_ok:1;
-			/**< L2 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
+			/** L2 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
 			uint64_t l2_ok:1;
-			/**< L3 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
+			/** L3 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
 			uint64_t l3_ok:1;
-			/**< L4 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
+			/** L4 layer is valid after passing all HW checks. */
 			uint64_t l4_ok:1;
-			/**< L2 layer CRC is valid. */
+			/** L2 layer CRC is valid. */
 			uint64_t l2_crc_ok:1;
-			/**< IPv4 layer checksum is valid. */
+			/** IPv4 layer checksum is valid. */
 			uint64_t ipv4_csum_ok:1;
-			/**< L4 layer checksum is valid. */
+			/** L4 layer checksum is valid. */
 			uint64_t l4_csum_ok:1;
-			/**< The l3 length is smaller than the frame length. */
+			/** L3 length is smaller than frame length. */
 			uint64_t l3_len_ok:1;
 			uint64_t reserved:56;
 		};