Tejun Heo wrote:
Jeff Garzik wrote:
Tejun Heo wrote:
This patch cleans up libata-acpi such that it looks similar to other
libata files. This patch doesn't introuce any behavior changes.
* make libata-acpi functions take ata_device instead of ata_port +
device index
* s/atadev/adev/
* de-indent local variable declarations
I prefer 'dev' over 'adev', unless that makes the code in question more
ambiguous.
Alan is preferring adev over dev and I thought that might be better in
the spirit of 'ap'. I don't really care about the naming tho. Will
convert to dev. It won't increase ambiguity.
Cool. You will see 'dev' used universally in the code I wrote. It also
matches well with "ata_dev_" prefixes, which are a bit better than
"ata_adev_" prefix if one were to apply the alternate policy.
Yes, I sometimes spend way too much time pay attention to trivialities :)
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
