Messages in this thread | | | From | David Brownell <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH -mm 2/2] PWM LED driver | Date | Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:41:11 -0800 |
| |
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 ...
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |