[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <06DFBC1E25D8024DB214DC7F41A3CD34488DD35B@ORSMSX101.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 18:40:25 +0000
From: "Vick, Matthew" <matthew.vick@...el.com>
To: "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
CC: "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>,
"sassmann@...hat.com" <sassmann@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [net-next 10/13] igb: Tidy up wrapping for CONFIG_IGB_PTP.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keller, Jacob E
> Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:04 AM
> To: Richard Cochran; Vick, Matthew
> Cc: Kirsher, Jeffrey T; davem@...emloft.net; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> gospo@...hat.com; sassmann@...hat.com
> Subject: RE: [net-next 10/13] igb: Tidy up wrapping for CONFIG_IGB_PTP.
>
> [...]
>
> Personally disagree here. I do agree that the churn is annoying with
> how it breaks git blame, however, in general I prefer tags at the end
> of #ifdefs even for short ones because it increases my ability to
> quickly spot matches. The end comment aligns with the starting comment,
> and even for small blocks makes it easier to process. It is less
> necessary the smaller the block, but I always prefer to have it than
> not.
>
> That said, it is nice when git blame points to the right place, and the
> comments aren't super necessary for such short blocks.
>
> - Jake
I tend to agree with Jake here--I like having the information. I'm fine removing them, but I'd like to do it for all CONFIG_IGB_PTP wrapping if we're going to do it. What do you think, Richard?
Cheers,
Matthew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists