Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Feb 2017 07:12:21 -0800 | From | Dmitry Torokhov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] device property: constify property arrays values |
| |
On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 01:43:03PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, 2017-02-02 at 17:41 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > Data that is fed into property arrays should not be modified, so let's > > mark > > relevant pointers as const. This will allow us making source arrays as > > const/__initconst. > > > > > @@ -718,7 +718,8 @@ static void pset_free_set(struct property_set > > *pset) > > static int pset_copy_entry(struct property_entry *dst, > > const struct property_entry *src) > > { > > - const char **d, **s; > > + const char * const *s; > > + char **d; > > You removed const here
Yes I did. It is hard to assign value to a constant otherwise.
> > > size_t i, nval; > > > > dst->name = kstrdup(src->name, GFP_KERNEL); > > @@ -731,12 +732,11 @@ static int pset_copy_entry(struct property_entry > > *dst, > > > > if (src->is_string) { > > nval = src->length / sizeof(const char *); > > - dst->pointer.str = kcalloc(nval, sizeof(const > > char *), > > - GFP_KERNEL); > > - if (!dst->pointer.str) > > + d = kcalloc(nval, sizeof(const char *), > > GFP_KERNEL); > > But left it here. Do we need to remove const?
I do not know why we had it in the first place: the size is the samei between constant and variable of the same type.
Ideally we'd use sizeof(*d), I can do it after this batch is accepted.
> > > + if (!d) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > - d = dst->pointer.str; > > + dst->pointer.raw_data = d; > > s = src->pointer.str; > > So, overall, do we need these changes at all? Nothing in commit message > sheds a light on it.
The compiler insists in them though.
> > > for (i = 0; i < nval; i++) { > > d[i] = kstrdup(s[i], GFP_KERNEL);
Thanks.
-- Dmitry
| |