Re: comments style: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/9] printk-rb: add a new printk ringbuffer implementation

[Petr Mladek]

On Wed 2019-08-21 07:42:57, John Ogness wrote:
> On 2019-08-20, Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/kernel/printk/dataring.c
> >> +/**
> >> + * _datablock_valid() - Check if given positions yield a valid data block.
> >> + *
> >> + * @dr:         The associated data ringbuffer.
> >> + *
> >> + * @head_lpos:  The newest data logical position.
> >> + *
> >> + * @tail_lpos:  The oldest data logical position.
> >> + *
> >> + * @begin_lpos: The beginning logical position of the data block to check.
> >> + *
> >> + * @next_lpos:  The logical position of the next adjacent data block.
> >> + *              This value is used to identify the end of the data block.
> >> + *
> >
> > Please remove the empty lines between arguments description. They make
> > the comments too scattered.
> 
> Your feedback is contradicting what PeterZ requested[0]. Particularly
> when multiple lines are involved with a description, I find the spacing
> helpful. I've grown to like the spacing, but I won't fight for it.

I do not want to fight over it. Just note that >90% of argument
descriptors seem to be one liners.

Best Regards,
Petr