From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
To: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Shreeya Patel <shreeya.patel@collabora.com>,
Paul Gazzillo <paul@pgazz.com>,
Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com>,
Zhigang Shi <Zhigang.Shi@liteon.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] iio: light: Add gain-time-scale helpers
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2023 17:29:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230318172941.36e41a79@jic23-huawei> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b4bf8587-d3cd-ff88-0276-7e394c110757@gmail.com>
> >
> >>>> + kfree(gts->avail_all_scales_table);
> >
> > ...
> >
> >>>> + per_time_gains = kcalloc(gts->num_itime, sizeof(int *), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>
> >>> sizeof(type) is error prone in comparison to sizeof(*var).
> >>
> >> Yes and no. In majority of cases where we see sizeof(*var) - the *var is no
> >> longer a pointer as having pointers to pointers is not _that_ common. When
> >> we see sizeof(type *) - we instantly know it is a size of a pointer and not
> >> a size of some other type.
> >>
> >> So yes, while having sizeof(*var) makes us tolerant to errors caused by
> >> variable type changes - it makes us prone to human reader errors. Also, if
> >> someone changes type of *var from pointer to some other type - then he/she
> >> is likely to in any case need to revise the array alloactions too.
> >>
> >> While I in general agree with you that the sizeof(variable) is better than
> >> sizeof(type) - I see that in cases like this the sizeof(type *) is clearer.
> >
> > Still get a fundamental disagreement on this. I would insist, but I'm not
> > a maintainer, so you are lucky :-) if Jonathan will not force you to follow
> > my way.
>
> In a code you are maintaining it is good to have it in your way as
> you're responsible for it. This is also why I insist on having things in
> a way I can read best for a code I plan to maintain - unless the
> subsystem maintainers see it hard to maintain for them. So, let's see if
> Jonathan has strong opinions on this one :)
This is one where I strongly prefer sizeof(*per_time_gains)
because it's easier to review. I don't care so much if it's easier to
modify as reality is these rarely get modified.
I often just 'fix' these up whilst applying.
Jonathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-18 17:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-06 9:15 [PATCH v3 0/6] Support ROHM BU27034 ALS sensor Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 9:15 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] dt-bindings: iio: light: Support ROHM BU27034 Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 9:17 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] iio: light: Add gain-time-scale helpers Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 12:52 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-12 16:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-13 12:56 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-13 13:14 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-14 6:19 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2023-03-14 11:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-18 17:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-19 14:28 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-18 17:24 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-13 12:47 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-13 13:25 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-13 13:59 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-13 14:17 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-13 14:25 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-18 17:29 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2023-03-12 17:06 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-12 17:08 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-13 12:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-13 13:11 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-13 13:29 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-13 13:59 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-15 10:51 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-15 14:12 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-15 14:14 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-03-17 10:19 ` Maxime Ripard
2023-03-17 10:57 ` Vaittinen, Matti
2023-03-13 12:52 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 9:17 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] iio: test: test " Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 9:19 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] MAINTAINERS: Add IIO " Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 9:23 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] iio: light: ROHM BU27034 Ambient Light Sensor Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-12 17:39 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-03-13 13:34 ` Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 9:27 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] MAINTAINERS: Add ROHM BU27034 Matti Vaittinen
2023-03-06 12:25 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] Support ROHM BU27034 ALS sensor Andy Shevchenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230318172941.36e41a79@jic23-huawei \
--to=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=Zhigang.Shi@liteon.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dmitry.osipenko@collabora.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com \
--cc=mazziesaccount@gmail.com \
--cc=paul@pgazz.com \
--cc=shreeya.patel@collabora.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox