From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71CE632C955; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 19:39:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760729979; cv=none; b=e8SHxkcpP4Sfw2I9GxYqxD2rul1PcBfPHdjAjrLhEIrQqZaxpWP0RYxu43ORnA2GSmWCL4v0bHsH374Eqw2WZMh15G2lP/uZUWeSJOawsAazUUxnFzN+pBRmA02qZCoIi0RXx3GbFjeYQ1uD/G7Hp/fAsEz3IDgw4NTQUof8NCw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760729979; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LhUB0GpUgK9F14BhCiULoa01j3fhb9rDCe/KcxgN2LA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=YwFEiTin0GWASbdqOdgL0QezBKL7GHPeQLEs92taHGb8yQqHaQQYy2SXs00Cw4+HBvF6a1t+mA2HoGI0hl3sI/RS9xAyQeQiWb19jgQPMdIfIGTmNwW1NmtVu3lYnlbbgEsAVfj4GE2ylIATPX1GG0BENPcvboZxNnPao9MMhgY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=oXxXfnHl; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.137.202.133 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="oXxXfnHl" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=2XmsMIjVw/ixg7JxgZV2GT8GjGC0FM4HT+IGUYyQpcM=; b=oXxXfnHl1uiSuj278E3kXgxwHr RFYzIyqgVUolJ3sDlgnvK9OkbahcdUHzmDgxjgg62dmRGcjX1LBpG596ep5piN0lWNSpWXWpv/lyZ OUPJWeHFeehBFK7rrL/X2FF27uhfyjZ1htvGDDlhm+esQre+rGDQQv8orAcXTZi3mQ+lSUXHGrWKF GW95gbZd4f9OVdhvVB6ohCOg9ocVIe29xIEOH/NT/DzZr4C/OMqR0NmtamI5X03XPH4mtO4b6jQNZ /Sg1djBIV2CYSiX+oFiZ/8o0HvLDuHwPj2CbnCZP5KJHfMBEfFSyEHr0xHCDd77jDUJDWE9oh4BFG PsWgPcfA==; Received: from [50.53.43.113] (helo=[192.168.254.34]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1v9qIa-00000008qjf-2XEE; Fri, 17 Oct 2025 19:39:36 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 12:39:36 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: workflows@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: checkpatch: Align block comment style To: Brian Norris , Dwaipayan Ray , Lukas Bulwahn , Jonathan Corbet Cc: workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Joe Perches References: <20251017180225.1489398-1-briannorris@chromium.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Randy Dunlap In-Reply-To: <20251017180225.1489398-1-briannorris@chromium.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/17/25 11:02 AM, Brian Norris wrote: > Ironically, the block style comments in the checkpatch documentation are > not aligned properly. Correct that. > > Signed-off-by: Brian Norris Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap Tested-by: Randy Dunlap However, I would just remove the entire second comment block and its lead-in comment. Networking no longer has its own comment style and it looks like checkpatch no longer checks for that. > --- > > Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst > index d5c47e560324..d7fe023b3080 100644 > --- a/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst > +++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/checkpatch.rst > @@ -461,16 +461,16 @@ Comments > line comments is:: > > /* > - * This is the preferred style > - * for multi line comments. > - */ > + * This is the preferred style > + * for multi line comments. > + */ > > The networking comment style is a bit different, with the first line > not empty like the former:: > > /* This is the preferred comment style > - * for files in net/ and drivers/net/ > - */ > + * for files in net/ and drivers/net/ > + */ > > See: https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#commenting > -- ~Randy