Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755130Ab3JGBBk (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Oct 2013 21:01:40 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f47.google.com ([209.85.215.47]:33283 "EHLO mail-la0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755049Ab3JGBBg (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Oct 2013 21:01:36 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20131007005355.GA22211@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20131006204518.GA20077@srcf.ucam.org> <20131006205928.GA20296@srcf.ucam.org> <20131006233106.GA21562@srcf.ucam.org> <20131006235702.GA21738@srcf.ucam.org> <20131007003247.GA21999@srcf.ucam.org> <20131007005355.GA22211@srcf.ucam.org> Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2013 20:01:34 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: update win8 OSI blacklist From: Felipe Contreras To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1788 Lines: 58 On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Sun, Oct 06, 2013 at 07:50:18PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 7:32 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> > I don't get the final >> > say in whether or not this patch gets merged, but there's a decent >> > chance that I'm going to be the one who has to remove the entries again >> > once the backlight mess is fixed up. My life would be significantly >> > easier if the entries are unambiguously identified in such a way that I >> > can remove them without having to dig through git history to figure out >> > where each came from. >> >> And a *single* comment on top of this group entries achieves that just >> fine. You haven't provided a single argument as to why that wouldn't >> be the case. > > No, it demonstrably doesn't. The comments that do exist refer to only a > subset of the entries underneath them. That's not true. /* * BIOS invocation of _OSI(Linux) is almost always a BIOS bug. * Linux ignores it, except for the machines enumerated below. */ > Having a per-entry comment is significantly clearer. That is your opinion, it's not a demonstrable fact. And just to be clear, you are saying that in the following code, you have no idea which statements correspond to which sections. Am I correct? /* section 1 */ a(); b(); c(); /* section 2 */ d(); e(); /* section 3 */ f(); And once again, the problem with the **current** format of the list is orthogonal to this patch. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/