On 2015/5/12 14:59, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 12 May 2015 at 03:25, <shannon.z...@linaro.org> wrote:
>> From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.z...@linaro.org>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <zhaoshengl...@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.z...@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> diff --git a/hw/audio/intel-hda.c b/hw/audio/intel-hda.c
>> index 433463e..d2b3f37 100644
>> --- a/hw/audio/intel-hda.c
>> +++ b/hw/audio/intel-hda.c
>> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
>>
>> static Property hda_props[] = {
>> DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("cad", HDACodecDevice, cad, -1),
>> - DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST()
>> + DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(),
>> };
>
> Why do we need to do this? The usual reason for having a comma
> after the last item in an array is so that if we add another
> item after it later we don't have to edit the line that used to
> be last. But with these lists the DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST()
> line remains last by definition -- new entries will always go
> above it, and anything below it would be a bug. So there's no
> point in having a comma after it.
>
Here I just want to make the code style consistent. If this is not
necessary, we can drop this one.
--
Shannon
