Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-04 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Em Mon, 04 Nov 2013 14:26:33 +0100 Hans Verkuil escreveu: > On 11/03/2013 10:12 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Em Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:21:32 -0200 > > Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu: > > > >> Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 22:59:04 +0100 > >> Hans Verkuil escreveu: > >> > >>> On 11/02/2013 10:53 PM,

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-04 Thread Hans Verkuil
On 11/03/2013 10:12 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:21:32 -0200 > Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu: > >> Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 22:59:04 +0100 >> Hans Verkuil escreveu: >> >>> On 11/02/2013 10:53 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote: On 11/02/2013 10:15 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-03 Thread Antti Palosaari
On 03.11.2013 11:12, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: Em Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:21:32 -0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu: Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 22:59:04 +0100 Hans Verkuil escreveu: On 11/02/2013 10:53 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote: On 11/02/2013 10:15 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: Em Sat, 02 Nov 201

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-03 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Em Sat, 2 Nov 2013 22:21:32 -0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab escreveu: > Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 22:59:04 +0100 > Hans Verkuil escreveu: > > > On 11/02/2013 10:53 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > On 11/02/2013 10:15 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > >> Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:25:19 +0100 > > >> Hans Verk

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-02 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 22:59:04 +0100 Hans Verkuil escreveu: > On 11/02/2013 10:53 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > On 11/02/2013 10:15 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > >> Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:25:19 +0100 > >> Hans Verkuil escreveu: > >> > >>> Hi Mauro, > >>> > >>> I'll review this series more caref

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-02 Thread Hans Verkuil
On 11/02/2013 10:53 PM, Hans Verkuil wrote: > On 11/02/2013 10:15 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: >> Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:25:19 +0100 >> Hans Verkuil escreveu: >> >>> Hi Mauro, >>> >>> I'll review this series more carefully on Monday, >> >> Thanks! >> >>> but for now I want to make >>> a sugges

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-02 Thread Hans Verkuil
On 11/02/2013 10:15 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:25:19 +0100 > Hans Verkuil escreveu: > >> Hi Mauro, >> >> I'll review this series more carefully on Monday, > > Thanks! > >> but for now I want to make >> a suggestion for the array checks: >> >> On 11/02/2013 02:31 P

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-02 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Em Sat, 02 Nov 2013 18:25:19 +0100 Hans Verkuil escreveu: > Hi Mauro, > > I'll review this series more carefully on Monday, Thanks! > but for now I want to make > a suggestion for the array checks: > > On 11/02/2013 02:31 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > Dynamic static allocation is evil,

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-02 Thread Hans Verkuil
Hi Mauro, I'll review this series more carefully on Monday, but for now I want to make a suggestion for the array checks: On 11/02/2013 02:31 PM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Dynamic static allocation is evil, as Kernel stack is too low, and > compilation complains about it on some archs: > >

Re: [PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-02 Thread Antti Palosaari
Acked-by: Antti Palosaari Reviewed-by: Antti Palosaari Antti On 02.11.2013 15:31, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: Dynamic static allocation is evil, as Kernel stack is too low, and compilation complains about it on some archs: drivers/media/tuners/e4000.c:50:1: warning: 'e4000_wr_regs'

[PATCHv2 19/29] tuners: Don't use dynamic static allocation

2013-11-02 Thread Mauro Carvalho Chehab
Dynamic static allocation is evil, as Kernel stack is too low, and compilation complains about it on some archs: drivers/media/tuners/e4000.c:50:1: warning: 'e4000_wr_regs' uses dynamic stack allocation [enabled by default] drivers/media/tuners/e4000.c:83:1: warning: 'e4000_rd_reg