[LinuxPPS] task force was I'm still here! :)

[Udo van den Heuvel]

Heiko Gerstung wrote:
> thanks a lot. Maybe we should form some sort of a task force for 
> LinuxPPS, Hal already did a great job breaking this whole thing into 
> several pieces:

Task force sounds OK to me.

> 1. Rewrite the in-line documentation to the kernel standards.  Make sure 
> these are not flagged in anyway by checkpatch.pl.  Doc change - possible 
> non-programmer task.

Current status:

# /usr/src/linux-2.6.28/scripts/checkpatch.pl ntp-pps-2.6.28-rc6
WARNING: do not add new typedefs
#603: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:61:
+typedef int pps_handle_t;		/* represents a PPS source */

WARNING: do not add new typedefs
#604: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:62:
+typedef unsigned long pps_seq_t;	/* sequence number */

WARNING: do not add new typedefs
#605: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:63:
+typedef struct ntp_fp ntp_fp_t;		/* NTP-compatible time stamp */

WARNING: do not add new typedefs
#606: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:64:
+typedef union pps_timeu pps_timeu_t;	/* generic data type for time 
stamps */

WARNING: do not add new typedefs
#607: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:65:
+typedef struct pps_info pps_info_t;

WARNING: do not add new typedefs
#608: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:66:
+typedef struct pps_params pps_params_t;

WARNING: plain inline is preferred over __inline
#626: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:84:
+static __inline int time_pps_create(int source, pps_handle_t *handle)

WARNING: plain inline is preferred over __inline
#651: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:109:
+static __inline int time_pps_destroy(pps_handle_t handle)

WARNING: plain inline is preferred over __inline
#656: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:114:
+static __inline int time_pps_getparams(pps_handle_t handle,

WARNING: plain inline is preferred over __inline
#674: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:132:
+static __inline int time_pps_setparams(pps_handle_t handle,

WARNING: plain inline is preferred over __inline
#690: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:148:
+static __inline int time_pps_getcap(pps_handle_t handle, int *mode)

WARNING: plain inline is preferred over __inline
#695: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:153:
+static __inline int time_pps_fetch(pps_handle_t handle, const int tsformat,

WARNING: plain inline is preferred over __inline
#728: FILE: Documentation/pps/timepps.h:186:
+static __inline int time_pps_kcbind(pps_handle_t handle,

ERROR: Missing Signed-off-by: line(s)

total: 1 errors, 13 warnings, 2549 lines checked

ntp-pps-2.6.28-rc6 has style problems, please review.  If any of these 
errors
are false positives report them to the maintainer, see
CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.

I see no complaints about the inline (in the source I assume) 
documentation, just coding issues.
Is there an example to get the idea of what needs to be done for this 
particular job? Then I could have a look over the code and documentation 
in there.

> 2. Clean up ioctl code to not use depreciated constructs and eliminate 
> redundant code.
> 
> 3. Divide pps.h into two header files. One for userspace ABI and one for 
> kernel only  interfaces.

Could be done based on ____KERNEL___ #ifdef ?

> 4. Remove conditional includes from the pps.h derivatives.
> 
> 
> So, you would be willing to work on 1. if I understood you correctly. 

Indeed, but I need some basic info to get started with some idea about 
the stuff that needs changing to what shape.

Udo