Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] docs/doxygen: doxygen documentation for grant_table.h

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 04.05.2021 15:33, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 4 May 2021, at 14:28, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 04.05.2021 15:09, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>>> On 4 May 2021, at 12:48, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On 04.05.2021 11:46, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>>>> @@ -451,11 +466,6 @@ DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(gnttab_transfer_t);
>>>>> * bytes to be copied.
>>>>> */
>>>>>
>>>>> -#define _GNTCOPY_source_gref      (0)
>>>>> -#define GNTCOPY_source_gref       (1<<_GNTCOPY_source_gref)
>>>>> -#define _GNTCOPY_dest_gref        (1)
>>>>> -#define GNTCOPY_dest_gref         (1<<_GNTCOPY_dest_gref)
>>>>> -
>>>>> struct gnttab_copy {
>>>>>    /* IN parameters. */
>>>>>    struct gnttab_copy_ptr {
>>>>> @@ -471,6 +481,12 @@ struct gnttab_copy {
>>>>>    /* OUT parameters. */
>>>>>    int16_t       status;
>>>>> };
>>>>> +
>>>>> +#define _GNTCOPY_source_gref      (0)
>>>>> +#define GNTCOPY_source_gref       (1<<_GNTCOPY_source_gref)
>>>>> +#define _GNTCOPY_dest_gref        (1)
>>>>> +#define GNTCOPY_dest_gref         (1<<_GNTCOPY_dest_gref)
>>>>
>>>> Didn't you say you agree with moving this back up some, next to the
>>>> field using these?
>>>
>>> My mistake! I’ll move it in the next patch, did you spot anything else I 
>>> might have forgot of what we agreed?
>>
>> No, thanks. I don't think I have any more comments to make on this
>> series (once this last aspect got addressed, and assuming no new
>> issues get introduced). But to be clear on that side as well - I
>> don't think I'm up to actually ack-ing the patch (let alone the
>> entire series).
> 
> Ok, at least would you mind to do a review by of the patches we discussed 
> together?

I'm afraid I don't understand: I did look over this one.

Jan