Re: [KJ] [PATCH] Fix warning in drivers/usb/media/ov511.c

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1440 bytes --]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 03:31:27PM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, H?kon L?vdal wrote:
> 
> > On 2/15/06, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 08:21:12PM -0600, Matthew Martin wrote:
> > > > -     unsigned char exp;
> > > > +     unsigned char exp = '\0';
> > >
> > > What's wrong with just "0" here?
> >
> > In my opinion '\0' is the correct representation here.
> >
> > '\0'	ASCII nul character
> > 0	arithmetic value zero
> > NULL	null pointer
> >
> > All of those _could_ be represented with just "0", however using 0 as
> > such a multipurpose character/value/pointer constant is not a good idea
> > because it makes the code less clear to read.
> >
> > Linus has been very clear on that NULL and only NULL should be used for
> > pointers, and there was a large set of patches converting from 0 to NULL
> > in 2004.
> >
> > How is '\0' vs 0 different?
> 
> I didn't see any problem with using '\0' either, as long as it's
> meant to be a character instead of an 8-bit integer.
> 
> Looking at ov511.c, it appears to be an 8-bit integer...
> so 0 makes more sense to me in this case.
> 
> I find its usage more interesting.  Did the patch also address
> this part?  What does this do?
> 
> 	sensor_get_exposure(ov, &exp);
> 	return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", exp >> 8);
> 
> Does that always print 0?  (for exp >> 8)

Heh, it should :)

Anyone have this device to test this with?

thanks,

greg k-h

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 168 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors