Re: [patch v5 06/19] x86/cpu: Provide a sane leaf 0xb/0x1f parser

[Borislav Petkov]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 03:17:45PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Especially x2apic_shift is horrible and the comments of EBX are visually
> impaired while with the C++ comments x2apic_shift looks natural and the
> EBX comments are just open to the right and therefore simpler.

I'd say, put comments *above* the member versus on the side. We don't
like side comments, if you remember. :-)

And, for example, the commenting in arch/x86/include/asm/fpu/types.h is
not half as bad and works real nice for struct definitions, I'd say.

But if you want to make that into a rule to have C++, side comments for
struct members I guess I'll get accustomed to it eventually.

> If it's caught in early testing, this should be fixed, no?

Hope dies last. :)

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette