[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:10:13 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
To: Mark Lord <liml@....ca>
CC: Thiago Farina <tfransosi@...il.com>, mlord@...ox.com,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ata: Clean up hard coded array size calculation.
On 11/10/2009 12:00 AM, Mark Lord wrote:
> Thiago Farina wrote:
>> Use ARRAY_SIZE macro of kernel api instead.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thiago Farina <tfransosi@...il.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/ata/sata_mv.c | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c
>> index 6f5093b..a8a7be0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_mv.c
>> @@ -2217,7 +2217,7 @@ static unsigned int mv_qc_issue_fis(struct
>> ata_queued_cmd *qc)
>> int err = 0;
>>
>> ata_tf_to_fis(&qc->tf, link->pmp, 1, (void *)fis);
>> - err = mv_send_fis(ap, fis, sizeof(fis) / sizeof(fis[0]));
>> + err = mv_send_fis(ap, fis, ARRAY_SIZE(fis));
>> if (err)
>> return err;
>>
> ..
>
> What's the point of this ?
>
> There is no "hardcoded array size" there to begin with,
> and using that silly macro obscures the actual calculation.
>
> So now, instead of being able to verify correctness at a glance,
> I have to go off and research some silly macro and verify that
> it does the right thing.
It is a standard cleanup for all kernel code, and it does make the code
more readable to the casual reader / quick skimmer.
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists