From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from rv-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.198.240]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1KeTHA-0006Ge-D1 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 13 Sep 2008 11:26:53 +0000 Received: by rv-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id b17so1606078rvf.42 for ; Sat, 13 Sep 2008 04:26:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <48CBA377.9020802@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2008 04:26:47 -0700 From: Zev Weiss MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lennert Buytenhek Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] [MTD] physmap.c: Add #endif comments References: <48CB5E9F.9060109@gmail.com> <20080913104641.GE21603@xi.wantstofly.org> In-Reply-To: <20080913104641.GE21603@xi.wantstofly.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 11:33:03PM -0700, Zev Weiss wrote: > >> Adding comments to a few of the less painfully-obvious #endifs. >> >> Signed-off-by: Zev Weiss >> --- >> drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c | 6 +++--- >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c b/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c >> index 6fba0d4..49e2039 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/maps/physmap.c >> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static void physmap_flash_shutdown(struct platform_device *dev) >> #define physmap_flash_suspend NULL >> #define physmap_flash_resume NULL >> #define physmap_flash_shutdown NULL >> -#endif >> +#endif /* CONFIG_PM */ >> >> static struct platform_driver physmap_flash_driver = { >> .probe = physmap_flash_probe, >> @@ -302,8 +302,8 @@ void physmap_set_partitions(struct mtd_partition *parts, int >> num_parts) >> physmap_flash_data.nr_parts = num_parts; >> physmap_flash_data.parts = parts; >> } >> -#endif >> -#endif >> +#endif /* CONFIG_MTD_PARTITIONS */ >> +#endif /* PHYSMAP_COMPAT */ > > I thought that this was frowned upon. (I don't like it myself, and > my editor is perfectly well capable of pointing out to me which ifdef > matches up with which endif.) > Ah, OK -- I found it slightly hard to follow the ones that get longer than a screenful or so, and I don't have my editor set to match them up nicely (though I might look into that). It's something I'm accustomed to doing and seeing, and I saw no mention of it one way or another in Documentation/CodingStyle, so I didn't really give it a second thought.