[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220328133743.xhdzmprlc7a6jxxy@maple.lan>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 14:37:43 +0100
From: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
To: Benjamin Stürz <benni@...erz.xyz>
Cc: andrew@...n.ch, sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com,
gregory.clement@...tlin.com, linux@...linux.org.uk,
linux@...tec.co.uk, krzk@...nel.org, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com, robert.moore@...el.com,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, lenb@...nel.org, 3chas3@...il.com,
laforge@...monks.org, arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
mchehab@...nel.org, tony.luck@...el.com, james.morse@....com,
rric@...nel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org, brgl@...ev.pl,
mike.marciniszyn@...nelisnetworks.com,
dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com, jgg@...pe.ca,
pali@...nel.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, isdn@...ux-pingi.de,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, fbarrat@...ux.ibm.com, ajd@...ux.ibm.com,
davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
nico@...xnic.net, loic.poulain@...aro.org, kvalo@...nel.org,
pkshih@...ltek.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, devel@...ica.org,
linux-atm-general@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
wcn36xx@...ts.infradead.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/22] s3c: Replace comments with C99 initializers
On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 05:58:49PM +0100, Benjamin Stürz wrote:
> This replaces comments with C99's designated
> initializers because the kernel supports them now.
I'm a bit puzzled by "because the kernel supports them now". Designated
initializers are not purely a C99 feature... it is also a GNU C extension
to C89. This language feature has been used by the kernel for a very long time
(well over a decade).
On other words it would be much more effective to advocate for the
change by saying "because the code is clearer and easier to read" rather
than "because we can".
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Stürz <benni@...erz.xyz>
> ---
> arch/arm/mach-s3c/bast-irq.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s3c/bast-irq.c b/arch/arm/mach-s3c/bast-irq.c
> index d299f124e6dc..bd5471f9973b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-s3c/bast-irq.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s3c/bast-irq.c
> @@ -29,22 +29,22 @@
> * the irq is not implemented
> */
> static const unsigned char bast_pc104_irqmasks[] = {
> - 0, /* 0 */
> - 0, /* 1 */
> - 0, /* 2 */
> - 1, /* 3 */
> - 0, /* 4 */
> - 2, /* 5 */
> - 0, /* 6 */
> - 4, /* 7 */
> - 0, /* 8 */
> - 0, /* 9 */
> - 8, /* 10 */
> - 0, /* 11 */
> - 0, /* 12 */
> - 0, /* 13 */
> - 0, /* 14 */
> - 0, /* 15 */
> + [0] = 0,
> + [1] = 0,
> + [2] = 0,
> + [3] = 1,
> + [4] = 0,
> + [5] = 2,
> + [6] = 0,
> + [7] = 4,
> + [8] = 0,
> + [9] = 0,
> + [10] = 8,
> + [11] = 0,
> + [12] = 0,
> + [13] = 0,
> + [14] = 0,
> + [15] = 0,
Shouldn't this just be as follows (in order to match bast_pc104_irqs)?
+static const unsigned char bast_pc104_irqmasks[16] = {
+ [3] = 1,
+ [5] = 2,
+ [7] = 4,
+ [10] = 8,
};
static const unsigned char bast_pc104_irqs[] = { 3, 5, 7, 10 };
Daniel.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists