From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pavel Machek Subject: Re: [KJ] [PATCH] drivers/acpi: sizeof/sizeof array size calculations replaced with ARRAY_SIZE Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 10:57:12 +0000 Message-ID: <20070610105712.GA4695@ucw.cz> References: <200705261239.27485.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> <46581C06.7000005@student.ltu.se> <200705261558.24912.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> <200705301525.05905.lenb@kernel.org> <20070531095603.GA24654@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:1253 "EHLO spitz.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755768AbXFJK5X (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Jun 2007 06:57:23 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070531095603.GA24654@infradead.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig , Len Brown , Andi Drebes , kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > > > > Any reason to not just replace ACPI_RSD_TABLE_SIZE with ARRAY_SIZE? > > > > Probably because ARRAY_SIZE doesn't exist in ACPICA, which is > > where this code comes from... > > > > When we change syntax in ACPICA files in Linux to make it more "beautiful", > > then it creates more work for me -- as forever on, that syntax difference > > must be manually compared to upstream ACPICA and Linux -- and that syntax > > difference causes upstream patches to no longer apply and require > > hand merging. > > Or we could stop that ACPCICA crap ASAP. The acpi code not only looks > like crap because of that but it's buggy as hell now. +1. Len, acpi subsystem is old enough to live by kernel standards, and important enough that it should look&feel like a kernel code. It also does not seem to change quickly, so merging patches should not be a big deal. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html