> > For the most part - I'm almost all in favor of this change. > > But just to make it clear - the actual fix could have been a one-liner, > > right? > > The rest are style changes.
> Correct. Having the correct length in the memset is a sufficient fix for the > warning, > but it felt wrong to send it since the root of the problem seems to be the > complexity of the code that was hiding it. ... > Generally speaking, feel free to treat any of my compile-time warning fix > patches as simple bug reports and apply a different fix that seems more > appropriate. I mainly send it in patch form since that seems to be the > quickest way to address any issues. Sure. Once net-next is re-opened I intend to push our next FW version which is also going to change some of the aRFS related configurations. So I think we should stick to the single-liner fix for now, and I'll revise the style [if still needed; I'll have to check] on that submission.
