> -----Original Message----- > From: Greg Kroah-Hartman [mailto:gre...@linuxfoundation.org] > Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 16:46 > To: Winkler, Tomas <tomas.wink...@intel.com> > Cc: Usyskin, Alexander <alexander.usys...@intel.com>; linux- > ker...@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [char-misc-next 3/3] mei: me: use an index instead of a pointer > for private data > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:15:57PM +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote: > > +static const struct mei_cfg *const mei_cfg_list[] = { > > + NULL, > > + &mei_me_legacy_cfg, > > + &mei_me_ich_cfg, > > + &mei_me_pch_cfg, > > + &mei_me_pch_cpt_pbg_cfg, > > + &mei_me_pch8_cfg, > > + &mei_me_pch8_sps_cfg, > > +}; > > Does this structure have to keep in sync with: > > > +enum mei_cfg_idx { > > + MEI_ME_UNDEF_CFG, > > + MEI_ME_LEGACY_CFG, > > + MEI_ME_ICH_CFG, > > + MEI_ME_PCH_CFG, > > + MEI_ME_PCH_CPT_PBG_CFG, > > + MEI_ME_PCH8_CFG, > > + MEI_ME_PCH8_SPS_CFG, > > + MEI_ME_NUM_CFG, > > +}; > > That value? > > If so, why not make it automatic and have the array use the enum values? > That way you know you get it right.
Do you mean 'designated Initializers'? I didn't know it's supported.. neat feature. > At the very least, document the heck out of this... Will do Thanks Tomas
