Thread (2 messages) 2 messages, 2 authors, 2022-03-28

RE: [PATCH 21/22] rtw89: Replace comments with C99 initializers

From: David Laight <hidden>
Date: 2022-03-28 12:21:24
Also in: linux-acpi, linux-edac, linux-gpio, linux-input, linux-media, linux-pci, linux-rdma, linux-samsung-soc, linux-wireless, lkml, netdev

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

From: Kalle Valo
Sent: 28 March 2022 10:29

Larry Finger [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
On 3/26/22 11:59, Benjamin Stürz wrote:
quoted
This replaces comments with C99's designated
initializers because the kernel supports them now.

Signed-off-by: Benjamin Stürz <redacted>
---
  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c | 40 +++++++++++------------
  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c
index 684583955511..3c83a0bfb120 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c
@@ -97,26 +97,26 @@ static const struct rtw89_btc_fbtc_slot s_def[] = {
  };
    static const u32 cxtbl[] = {
-	0xffffffff, /* 0 */
-	0xaaaaaaaa, /* 1 */
-	0x55555555, /* 2 */
-	0x66555555, /* 3 */
-	0x66556655, /* 4 */
-	0x5a5a5a5a, /* 5 */
-	0x5a5a5aaa, /* 6 */
-	0xaa5a5a5a, /* 7 */
-	0x6a5a5a5a, /* 8 */
-	0x6a5a5aaa, /* 9 */
-	0x6a5a6a5a, /* 10 */
-	0x6a5a6aaa, /* 11 */
-	0x6afa5afa, /* 12 */
-	0xaaaa5aaa, /* 13 */
-	0xaaffffaa, /* 14 */
-	0xaa5555aa, /* 15 */
-	0xfafafafa, /* 16 */
-	0xffffddff, /* 17 */
-	0xdaffdaff, /* 18 */
-	0xfafadafa  /* 19 */
+	[0]  = 0xffffffff,
+	[1]  = 0xaaaaaaaa,
+	[2]  = 0x55555555,
+	[3]  = 0x66555555,
+	[4]  = 0x66556655,
+	[5]  = 0x5a5a5a5a,
+	[6]  = 0x5a5a5aaa,
+	[7]  = 0xaa5a5a5a,
+	[8]  = 0x6a5a5a5a,
+	[9]  = 0x6a5a5aaa,
+	[10] = 0x6a5a6a5a,
+	[11] = 0x6a5a6aaa,
+	[12] = 0x6afa5afa,
+	[13] = 0xaaaa5aaa,
+	[14] = 0xaaffffaa,
+	[15] = 0xaa5555aa,
+	[16] = 0xfafafafa,
+	[17] = 0xffffddff,
+	[18] = 0xdaffdaff,
+	[19] = 0xfafadafa
  };
    struct rtw89_btc_btf_tlv {

Is this change really necessary? Yes, the entries must be ordered;
however, the comment carries that information at very few extra
characters. To me, this patch looks like unneeded source churn.
One small benefit I see is to avoid the comment index being wrong and
there would be no way to catch that. But otherwise I don't have any
opinion about this.
If the [nn] are wrong the effect is probably worse.
You really don't want a gap!

Doesn't seem worth using C99 initialisers unless they are
#defines or enum values.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help