From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:50741 "EHLO mout.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759185AbcKCVGL (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:06:11 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/34] [media] DaVinci-VPFE-Capture: Improve another size determination in vpfe_enum_input() To: Hans Verkuil , linux-media@vger.kernel.org References: <88b3de4c-5f3f-9f70-736b-039dca6b8a2e@users.sourceforge.net> Cc: Hans Verkuil , "Lad, Prabhakar" , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org From: SF Markus Elfring Message-ID: <6a3a4a79-d428-f5d9-87e0-97fd91b75c2a@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 22:05:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >> @@ -1091,7 +1091,7 @@ static int vpfe_enum_input(struct file *file, void *priv, >> return -EINVAL; >> } >> sdinfo = &vpfe_dev->cfg->sub_devs[subdev]; >> - memcpy(inp, &sdinfo->inputs[index], sizeof(struct v4l2_input)); >> + memcpy(inp, &sdinfo->inputs[index], sizeof(*inp)); > > If I am not mistaken this can be written as: > > *inp = sdinfo->inputs[index]; > > Much better. At which position would you like to integrate a second approach for such a change from this patch series? * Do you expect me to send a "V2" for the whole series? * Will an update step be appropriate if I would rebase it on other recently accepted suggestions? Regards, Markus