From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A1DDDF48 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 11:23:37 +1100 (EST) In-Reply-To: <200701030057.08957.m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl> References: <200701021238.36297.m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl> <1220f3e52f791ff8871ca9328b027a5a@kernel.crashing.org> <200701030057.08957.m.kozlowski@tuxland.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: From: Segher Boessenkool Subject: Re: [PATCH] ppc: vio of_node_put cleanup Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2007 01:24:04 +0100 To: Mariusz Kozlowski Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, paulus@samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , >> The comment used to be inside the "if" block, is this >> change correct? > > You'd prefer an empty line in there? Obviously, you should change the comment to include the conditional, if that is what is needed. >> [And, do we want all these changes anyway? I don't care >> either way, both sides have their pros and their cons -- >> just asking :-) ] > > You know my opinion already :-) Heh. Ok, I'll rephrase: is there _consensus_ that this is a good thing :-) [But never mind, I looked it up, and it is *documented* as being supported, so fine with me]. Segher