On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 11:15 PM Daniel Dadap <ddadap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 9/2/21 4:35 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 5:37 AM Daniel Dadap<ddadap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 9/1/21 10:57 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 2:27 AM Daniel Dadap<ddadap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... > Okay, thanks. I suppose I should have <linux/acpi.h> as well: Yes. ... > >>> Missed comma. > >> Oops. I am definitely a fan of using commas here, but I removed the > >> commas that I had in place for the last elements of these enums, and > >> members of static initialized structs, because I was trying to more > >> broadly apply feedback from earlier to drop the terminal comma in the > >> static initialized device table. I realize now that this feedback was > >> meant only for the case of the empty struct terminator element in the > >> device table. > > Not only, the _MAX in the above enum is correct in leaving commas out. > > No, I think it does need a comma, unless I'm misunderstanding why you're > saying it doesn't. WMAA_GET_MAX here isn't saying "this is the final > element of the enum which is also a count of the 'real' enum values"; > it's saying "retrieve the maximum valid brightness level from the > firmware". I renamed the enumerant to WMAA_GET_MAX_LEVEL to avoid > aliasing with the common "_MAX" convention for the final value defined > in an enum. In that case, you are right. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
