Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753916AbdCaSnT (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Mar 2017 14:43:19 -0400 Received: from mail-vk0-f66.google.com ([209.85.213.66]:36001 "EHLO mail-vk0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752497AbdCaSnR (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Mar 2017 14:43:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1490985230.27353.18.camel@perches.com> References: <1490978804-25549-1-git-send-email-singhalsimran0@gmail.com> <1490978804-25549-2-git-send-email-singhalsimran0@gmail.com> <1490985230.27353.18.camel@perches.com> From: SIMRAN SINGHAL Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2017 00:13:15 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] iio: health: afe440x: Remove code in comments To: Joe Perches Cc: Jonathan Cameron , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List 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: 4912 Lines: 100 On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 12:03 AM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 22:16 +0530, simran singhal wrote: >> Commenting out code is a bad idea. >> As comments are for explaining what code is about. > > patch doesn't match commit message. In commit message I am clearly saying commenting out the code is a bad Idea. As comments are for explaining what code is about. And that's what I am doing in the patch deleting the commented codes. My subject also says "Remove code in comments" Than what is not matching? > >> Signed-off-by: simran singhal >> --- >> drivers/iio/health/afe440x.h | 58 -------------------------------------------- >> 1 file changed, 58 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/iio/health/afe440x.h b/drivers/iio/health/afe440x.h >> index 1a0f247..71e2f0e 100644 >> --- a/drivers/iio/health/afe440x.h >> +++ b/drivers/iio/health/afe440x.h >> @@ -88,56 +88,11 @@ >> #define AFE440X_CONTROL0_WRITE 0x0 >> #define AFE440X_CONTROL0_READ 0x1 >> >> -#define AFE440X_INTENSITY_CHAN(_index, _mask) \ >> - { \ >> - .type = IIO_INTENSITY, \ >> - .channel = _index, \ >> - .address = _index, \ >> - .scan_index = _index, \ >> - .scan_type = { \ >> - .sign = 's', \ >> - .realbits = 24, \ >> - .storagebits = 32, \ >> - .endianness = IIO_CPU, \ >> - }, \ >> - .info_mask_separate = BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW) | \ >> - _mask, \ >> - .indexed = true, \ >> - } >> - >> -#define AFE440X_CURRENT_CHAN(_index) \ >> - { \ >> - .type = IIO_CURRENT, \ >> - .channel = _index, \ >> - .address = _index, \ >> - .scan_index = -1, \ >> - .info_mask_separate = BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW) | \ >> - BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_SCALE), \ >> - .indexed = true, \ >> - .output = true, \ >> - } >> - >> struct afe440x_val_table { >> int integer; >> int fract; >> }; >> >> -#define AFE440X_TABLE_ATTR(_name, _table) \ >> -static ssize_t _name ## _show(struct device *dev, \ >> - struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) \ >> -{ \ >> - ssize_t len = 0; \ >> - int i; \ >> - \ >> - for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(_table); i++) \ >> - len += scnprintf(buf + len, PAGE_SIZE - len, "%d.%06u ", \ >> - _table[i].integer, \ >> - _table[i].fract); \ >> - \ >> - buf[len - 1] = '\n'; \ >> - \ >> - return len; \ >> -} \ >> static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(_name) >> >> struct afe440x_attr { >> @@ -147,17 +102,4 @@ struct afe440x_attr { >> unsigned int table_size; >> }; >> >> -#define to_afe440x_attr(_dev_attr) \ >> - container_of(_dev_attr, struct afe440x_attr, dev_attr) >> - >> -#define AFE440X_ATTR(_name, _field, _table) \ >> - struct afe440x_attr afe440x_attr_##_name = { \ >> - .dev_attr = __ATTR(_name, (S_IRUGO | S_IWUSR), \ >> - afe440x_show_register, \ >> - afe440x_store_register), \ >> - .field = _field, \ >> - .val_table = _table, \ >> - .table_size = ARRAY_SIZE(_table), \ >> - } >> - >> #endif /* _AFE440X_H */