/sizeof(*E))
|
(sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(E[...]))
|
(sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(T))
)
Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure
---
Changes in v2:
This patch was part of bigger patch (wrongly sent in a series, sorry).
The previous patch has been split to all changes in drivers/net/wireless
are in a separate patch sent
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 15:22:24 -0400
bfie...@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) wrote:
> Mainly I'd just like to know which you're asking for. Do you want me to
> apply this, or to ACK it so someone else can? If it's sent as a series
> I tend to assume the latter.
>
> But in this case I'm assuming it'
On Mon, 02 Oct 2017 16:46:29 +0300
Kalle Valo wrote:
> We have a tree for wireless so usually it's better to submit wireless
> changes on their own but here I assume Dave will apply this to his tree.
> If not, please resubmit the wireless part in a separate patch.
Ok, I note that.
I'll wait Dave
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 16:07:36 +0300
Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > + {&gainctrl_lut_core0_rev0, ARRAY_SIZE(gainctrl_lut_core0_rev0), 26,
> > 192,
> > +32},
>
> For all such cases I would rather put on one line disregard checkpatch
> warning for better readability.
I agree that it woul
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:01:31 +1100
"Tobin C. Harding" wrote:
> > In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
> > series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
> > This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.
>
> Why don
Hi everyone,
Using ARRAY_SIZE improves the code readability. I used coccinelle (I
made a change to the array_size.cocci file [1]) to find several places
where ARRAY_SIZE could be used instead of other macros or sizeof
division.
I tried to divide the changes into a patch per subsystem (excepted for
/sizeof(*E))
|
(sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(E[...]))
|
(sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(T))
)
Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure
---
drivers/net/ethernet/emulex/benet/be_cmds.c| 4 +-
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_adminq.h | 3 +-
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40evf/i40e_adminq.h| 3
