Re: [PATCH -mm 2/2] PWM LED driver

[David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>]

On Monday 28 January 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > -     if (i > 0) {
> > -             for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
> > -                     led_classdev_unregister(&leds[i].cdev);
> > -                     pwm_channel_free(&leds[i].pwmc);
> > -             }
> > +     while (i-- > 0) {
> > +             led_classdev_unregister(&leds[i].cdev);
> > +             pwm_channel_free(&leds[i].pwmc);
> >       }
> 
> Looks OK, although I'd say that `while (--i >= 0)' is more idiomatic -
> predecrement, postincrement and all that?

Except for the "unsigned i;" declaration earlier... given that,
"while (true) cpu_relax();" becomes maximally idiomatic.  :)

Odd how PDP-11 idioms linger.  Just because C was designed on
that processor ...