Re: [igt-dev] [PATCH v2] tests/i915_pm_rpm: improved strictness and verbosity of i2c subtest

Ville Syrjälä
2019-06-17T13:26:49Z

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:29AM +0000, Vasilev, Oleg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thank you for the review. I've sent an updated patch.
>
> On Fri, 2019-06-14 at 18:30 +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 04:06:23PM +0300, Oleg Vasilev wrote:
> > >
> > > +static void format_hex_string(unsigned char edid[static
> > > EDID_LENGTH],
> > > + char buf[static EDID_LENGTH * 5 + 1])
> >
> > What's the deal with those 'static's?
>
> This enforces an array size to be at least EDID_LENGTH.
>
> https://hamberg.no/erlend/posts/2013-02-18-static-array-indices.html

Interesting. Ugly, but interesting.

Doesn't look like gcc cares about this at all though. I doesn't even
care if I do silly things like:

int foo(int x[static 8])
{
return x[20];
}

I guess clang is better?

--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel