[PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[Jérémy Lefaure]

Hi everyone,
Using ARRAY_SIZE improves the code readability. I used coccinelle (I
made a change to the array_size.cocci file [1]) to find several places
where ARRAY_SIZE could be used instead of other macros or sizeof
division.

I tried to divide the changes into a patch per subsystem (excepted for
staging). If one of the patch should be split into several patches, let
me know.

In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.

This series is based on linux-next next-20170929. Each patch has been
tested by building the relevant files with W=1.

This series contains the following patches:
[PATCH 01/18] sound: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 02/18] tracing/filter: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 03/18] media: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 04/18] IB/mlx5: Use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 05/18] net: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 06/18] drm: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 07/18] scsi: bfa: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 08/18] ecryptfs: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 09/18] nfsd: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 10/18] orangefs: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 11/18] dm space map metadata: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 12/18] x86: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 13/18] tpm: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 14/18] ipmi: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 15/18] acpi: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 16/18] media: staging: atomisp: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 17/18] staging: rtl8723bs: use ARRAY_SIZE
[PATCH 18/18] staging: rtlwifi: use ARRAY_SIZE


[1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/13/689

[PATCH 06/18] drm: use ARRAY_SIZE

[Jérémy Lefaure]

Using the ARRAY_SIZE macro improves the readability of the code. Also,
it is not always useful to use a variable to store this constant
calculated at compile time nor to re-invent the ARRAY_SIZE macro.

Found with Coccinelle with the following semantic patch:
@r depends on (org || report)@
type T;
T[] E;
position p;
@@
(
 (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(*E))
|
 (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(E[...]))
|
 (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(T))
)

Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@lse.epita.fr>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c           |  9 +++++----
 drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c           |  9 +++++----
 drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c         |  9 ++++-----
 drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c                 |  3 ++-
 drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c |  7 ++++---
 drivers/gpu/drm/via/via_verifier.c              | 10 ++++------
 6 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
index dfc10b1baea0..304862e2a8a6 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
  * OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
  *
  */
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/firmware.h>
 #include <drm/drmP.h>
 #include "amdgpu.h"
@@ -3952,10 +3953,10 @@ static int gfx_v8_0_init_save_restore_list(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
 				adev->gfx.rlc.reg_list_format_size_bytes >> 2,
 				unique_indices,
 				&indices_count,
-				sizeof(unique_indices) / sizeof(int),
+				ARRAY_SIZE(unique_indices),
 				indirect_start_offsets,
 				&offset_count,
-				sizeof(indirect_start_offsets)/sizeof(int));
+				ARRAY_SIZE(indirect_start_offsets));
 
 	/* save and restore list */
 	WREG32_FIELD(RLC_SRM_CNTL, AUTO_INCR_ADDR, 1);
@@ -3977,14 +3978,14 @@ static int gfx_v8_0_init_save_restore_list(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
 	/* starting offsets starts */
 	WREG32(mmRLC_GPM_SCRATCH_ADDR,
 		adev->gfx.rlc.starting_offsets_start);
-	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(indirect_start_offsets)/sizeof(int); i++)
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(indirect_start_offsets); i++)
 		WREG32(mmRLC_GPM_SCRATCH_DATA,
 				indirect_start_offsets[i]);
 
 	/* unique indices */
 	temp = mmRLC_SRM_INDEX_CNTL_ADDR_0;
 	data = mmRLC_SRM_INDEX_CNTL_DATA_0;
-	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(unique_indices) / sizeof(int); i++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(unique_indices); i++) {
 		if (unique_indices[i] != 0) {
 			WREG32(temp + i, unique_indices[i] & 0x3FFFF);
 			WREG32(data + i, unique_indices[i] >> 20);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
index deeaee1457ef..180726f4f34e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
  * OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
  *
  */
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/firmware.h>
 #include <drm/drmP.h>
 #include "amdgpu.h"
@@ -1730,10 +1731,10 @@ static int gfx_v9_0_init_rlc_save_restore_list(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
 				adev->gfx.rlc.reg_list_format_size_bytes >> 2,
 				unique_indirect_regs,
 				&unique_indirect_reg_count,
-				sizeof(unique_indirect_regs)/sizeof(int),
+				ARRAY_SIZE(unique_indirect_regs),
 				indirect_start_offsets,
 				&indirect_start_offsets_count,
-				sizeof(indirect_start_offsets)/sizeof(int));
+				ARRAY_SIZE(indirect_start_offsets));
 
 	/* enable auto inc in case it is disabled */
 	tmp = RREG32(SOC15_REG_OFFSET(GC, 0, mmRLC_SRM_CNTL));
@@ -1770,12 +1771,12 @@ static int gfx_v9_0_init_rlc_save_restore_list(struct amdgpu_device *adev)
 	/* write the starting offsets to RLC scratch ram */
 	WREG32(SOC15_REG_OFFSET(GC, 0, mmRLC_GPM_SCRATCH_ADDR),
 		adev->gfx.rlc.starting_offsets_start);
-	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(indirect_start_offsets)/sizeof(int); i++)
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(indirect_start_offsets); i++)
 		WREG32(SOC15_REG_OFFSET(GC, 0, mmRLC_GPM_SCRATCH_DATA),
 			indirect_start_offsets[i]);
 
 	/* load unique indirect regs*/
-	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(unique_indirect_regs)/sizeof(int); i++) {
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(unique_indirect_regs); i++) {
 		WREG32(SOC15_REG_OFFSET(GC, 0, mmRLC_SRM_INDEX_CNTL_ADDR_0) + i,
 			unique_indirect_regs[i] & 0x3FFFF);
 		WREG32(SOC15_REG_OFFSET(GC, 0, mmRLC_SRM_INDEX_CNTL_DATA_0) + i,
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c
index e787d376ba67..84507912be84 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c
@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@
 #include "psb_drv.h"
 #include "psb_intel_sdvo_regs.h"
 #include "psb_intel_reg.h"
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
 
 #define SDVO_TMDS_MASK (SDVO_OUTPUT_TMDS0 | SDVO_OUTPUT_TMDS1)
 #define SDVO_RGB_MASK  (SDVO_OUTPUT_RGB0 | SDVO_OUTPUT_RGB1)
@@ -62,8 +63,6 @@ static const char *tv_format_names[] = {
 	"SECAM_60"
 };
 
-#define TV_FORMAT_NUM  (sizeof(tv_format_names) / sizeof(*tv_format_names))
-
 struct psb_intel_sdvo {
 	struct gma_encoder base;
 
@@ -148,7 +147,7 @@ struct psb_intel_sdvo_connector {
 	int force_audio;
 
 	/* This contains all current supported TV format */
-	u8 tv_format_supported[TV_FORMAT_NUM];
+	u8 tv_format_supported[ARRAY_SIZE(tv_format_names)];
 	int   format_supported_num;
 	struct drm_property *tv_format;
 
@@ -1709,7 +1708,7 @@ psb_intel_sdvo_set_property(struct drm_connector *connector,
 	}
 
 	if (property == psb_intel_sdvo_connector->tv_format) {
-		if (val >= TV_FORMAT_NUM)
+		if (val >= ARRAY_SIZE(tv_format_names))
 			return -EINVAL;
 
 		if (psb_intel_sdvo->tv_format_index ==
@@ -2269,7 +2268,7 @@ static bool psb_intel_sdvo_tv_create_property(struct psb_intel_sdvo *psb_intel_s
 		return false;
 
 	psb_intel_sdvo_connector->format_supported_num = 0;
-	for (i = 0 ; i < TV_FORMAT_NUM; i++)
+	for (i = 0 ; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tv_format_names); i++)
 		if (format_map & (1 << i))
 			psb_intel_sdvo_connector->tv_format_supported[psb_intel_sdvo_connector->format_supported_num++] = i;
 
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c
index 02c61a1ad56a..9c6d2849c5b7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
  *
  */
 
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include "i915_drv.h"
 #include "gvt.h"
 #include "i915_pvinfo.h"
@@ -116,7 +117,7 @@ int intel_gvt_init_vgpu_types(struct intel_gvt *gvt)
 	 */
 	low_avail = gvt_aperture_sz(gvt) - HOST_LOW_GM_SIZE;
 	high_avail = gvt_hidden_sz(gvt) - HOST_HIGH_GM_SIZE;
-	num_types = sizeof(vgpu_types) / sizeof(vgpu_types[0]);
+	num_types = ARRAY_SIZE(vgpu_types);
 
 	gvt->types = kzalloc(num_types * sizeof(struct intel_vgpu_type),
 			     GFP_KERNEL);
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
index b58ee99f7bfc..9cc10e438b3d 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c
@@ -36,6 +36,8 @@
 #include <subdev/i2c.h>
 #include <subdev/vga.h>
 
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
+
 #define bioslog(lvl, fmt, args...) do {                                        \
 	nvkm_printk(init->subdev, lvl, info, "0x%08x[%c]: "fmt,                \
 		    init->offset, init_exec(init) ?                            \
@@ -2271,8 +2273,6 @@ static struct nvbios_init_opcode {
 	[0xaa] = { init_reserved },
 };
 
-#define init_opcode_nr (sizeof(init_opcode) / sizeof(init_opcode[0]))
-
 int
 nvbios_exec(struct nvbios_init *init)
 {
@@ -2281,7 +2281,8 @@ nvbios_exec(struct nvbios_init *init)
 	init->nested++;
 	while (init->offset) {
 		u8 opcode = nvbios_rd08(bios, init->offset);
-		if (opcode >= init_opcode_nr || !init_opcode[opcode].exec) {
+		if (opcode >= ARRAY_SIZE(init_opcode) ||
+		    !init_opcode[opcode].exec) {
 			error("unknown opcode 0x%02x\n", opcode);
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/via/via_verifier.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/via/via_verifier.c
index 0677bbf4ec7e..fb2609434df7 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/via/via_verifier.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/via/via_verifier.c
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@
 #include <drm/drm_legacy.h>
 #include "via_verifier.h"
 #include "via_drv.h"
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
 
 typedef enum {
 	state_command,
@@ -1102,10 +1103,7 @@ setup_hazard_table(hz_init_t init_table[], hazard_t table[], int size)
 
 void via_init_command_verifier(void)
 {
-	setup_hazard_table(init_table1, table1,
-			   sizeof(init_table1) / sizeof(hz_init_t));
-	setup_hazard_table(init_table2, table2,
-			   sizeof(init_table2) / sizeof(hz_init_t));
-	setup_hazard_table(init_table3, table3,
-			   sizeof(init_table3) / sizeof(hz_init_t));
+	setup_hazard_table(init_table1, table1, ARRAY_SIZE(init_table1));
+	setup_hazard_table(init_table2, table2, ARRAY_SIZE(init_table2));
+	setup_hazard_table(init_table3, table3, ARRAY_SIZE(init_table3));
 }
-- 
2.14.1

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[Tobin C. Harding]

On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 03:30:38PM -0400, Jérémy Lefaure wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> Using ARRAY_SIZE improves the code readability. I used coccinelle (I
> made a change to the array_size.cocci file [1]) to find several places
> where ARRAY_SIZE could be used instead of other macros or sizeof
> division.
> 
> I tried to divide the changes into a patch per subsystem (excepted for
> staging). If one of the patch should be split into several patches, let
> me know.
> 
> In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
> series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
> This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.

Why don't you just send individual patches for each subsystem? I'm not a maintainer but I don't see
how any one person is going to be able to apply this whole series, it is making it hard for
maintainers if they have to pick patches out from among the series (if indeed any will bother
doing that).

I get that this will be more work for you but AFAIK we are optimizing for maintainers.

Good luck,
Tobin.

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[Jérémy Lefaure]

On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:01:31 +1100
"Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc> wrote:

> > In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
> > series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
> > This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.  
> 
> Why don't you just send individual patches for each subsystem? I'm not a maintainer but I don't see
> how any one person is going to be able to apply this whole series, it is making it hard for
> maintainers if they have to pick patches out from among the series (if indeed any will bother
> doing that).
Yeah, maybe it would have been better to send individual patches.

From my point of view it's a series because the patches are related (I
did a git format-patch from my local branch). But for the maintainers
point of view, they are individual patches.

As each patch in this series is standalone, the maintainers can pick
the patches they want and apply them individually. So yeah, maybe I
should have sent individual patches. But I also wanted to tie all
patches together as it's the same change.

Anyway, I can tell to each maintainer that they can apply the patches
they're concerned about and next time I may send individual patches.

Thank you for your answer,
Jérémy
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[Greg KH]

On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 08:52:20PM -0400, Jérémy Lefaure wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:01:31 +1100
> "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc> wrote:
> 
> > > In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
> > > series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
> > > This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.  
> > 
> > Why don't you just send individual patches for each subsystem? I'm not a maintainer but I don't see
> > how any one person is going to be able to apply this whole series, it is making it hard for
> > maintainers if they have to pick patches out from among the series (if indeed any will bother
> > doing that).
> Yeah, maybe it would have been better to send individual patches.
> 
> From my point of view it's a series because the patches are related (I
> did a git format-patch from my local branch). But for the maintainers
> point of view, they are individual patches.

And the maintainers view is what matters here, if you wish to get your
patches reviewed and accepted...

thanks,

greg k-h
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 06/18] drm: use ARRAY_SIZE

[Jani Nikula]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2017, Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@lse.epita.fr> wrote:
> Using the ARRAY_SIZE macro improves the readability of the code. Also,
> it is not always useful to use a variable to store this constant
> calculated at compile time nor to re-invent the ARRAY_SIZE macro.
>
> Found with Coccinelle with the following semantic patch:
> @r depends on (org || report)@
> type T;
> T[] E;
> position p;
> @@
> (
>  (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(*E))
> |
>  (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(E[...]))
> |
>  (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(T))
> )
>
> Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@lse.epita.fr>

Please split this up.

Patch 1:
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c           |  9 +++++----
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c           |  9 +++++----

Patch 2:
>  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c         |  9 ++++-----

Patch 3:
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c                 |  3 ++-

Patch 4:
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c |  7 ++++---

Patch 5:
>  drivers/gpu/drm/via/via_verifier.c              | 10 ++++------

BR,
Jani.

-- 
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Nouveau mailing list
Nouveau@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/nouveau

Re: [PATCH 06/18] drm: use ARRAY_SIZE

[Thierry Reding]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1109 bytes --]

On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 03:30:44PM -0400, Jérémy Lefaure wrote:
> Using the ARRAY_SIZE macro improves the readability of the code. Also,
> it is not always useful to use a variable to store this constant
> calculated at compile time nor to re-invent the ARRAY_SIZE macro.
> 
> Found with Coccinelle with the following semantic patch:
> @r depends on (org || report)@
> type T;
> T[] E;
> position p;
> @@
> (
>  (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(*E))
> |
>  (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(E[...]))
> |
>  (sizeof(E)@p /sizeof(T))
> )
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@lse.epita.fr>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v8_0.c           |  9 +++++----
>  drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/gfx_v9_0.c           |  9 +++++----
>  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/psb_intel_sdvo.c         |  9 ++++-----
>  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/vgpu.c                 |  3 ++-
>  drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nvkm/subdev/bios/init.c |  7 ++++---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/via/via_verifier.c              | 10 ++++------
>  6 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

Reviewed-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Em Sun, 1 Oct 2017 20:52:20 -0400
Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@lse.epita.fr> escreveu:

> Anyway, I can tell to each maintainer that they can apply the patches
> they're concerned about and next time I may send individual patches.

In the case of media, we'll handle it as if they were individual ones.

Thanks,
Mauro

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[Zhi Wang]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1908 bytes --]

Thanks for the patch! :)

2017-10-01 22:30 GMT+03:00 Jérémy Lefaure <jeremy.lefaure@lse.epita.fr>:

> Hi everyone,
> Using ARRAY_SIZE improves the code readability. I used coccinelle (I
> made a change to the array_size.cocci file [1]) to find several places
> where ARRAY_SIZE could be used instead of other macros or sizeof
> division.
>
> I tried to divide the changes into a patch per subsystem (excepted for
> staging). If one of the patch should be split into several patches, let
> me know.
>
> In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
> series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
> This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.
>
> This series is based on linux-next next-20170929. Each patch has been
> tested by building the relevant files with W=1.
>
> This series contains the following patches:
> [PATCH 01/18] sound: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 02/18] tracing/filter: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 03/18] media: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 04/18] IB/mlx5: Use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 05/18] net: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 06/18] drm: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 07/18] scsi: bfa: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 08/18] ecryptfs: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 09/18] nfsd: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 10/18] orangefs: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 11/18] dm space map metadata: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 12/18] x86: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 13/18] tpm: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 14/18] ipmi: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 15/18] acpi: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 16/18] media: staging: atomisp: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 17/18] staging: rtl8723bs: use ARRAY_SIZE
> [PATCH 18/18] staging: rtlwifi: use ARRAY_SIZE
>
>
> [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/9/13/689
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-gfx mailing list
> Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2555 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 160 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 07:35:54AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 01, 2017 at 08:52:20PM -0400, Jérémy Lefaure wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:01:31 +1100
> > "Tobin C. Harding" <me@tobin.cc> wrote:
> > 
> > > > In order to reduce the size of the To: and Cc: lines, each patch of the
> > > > series is sent only to the maintainers and lists concerned by the patch.
> > > > This cover letter is sent to every list concerned by this series.  
> > > 
> > > Why don't you just send individual patches for each subsystem? I'm not a maintainer but I don't see
> > > how any one person is going to be able to apply this whole series, it is making it hard for
> > > maintainers if they have to pick patches out from among the series (if indeed any will bother
> > > doing that).
> > Yeah, maybe it would have been better to send individual patches.
> > 
> > From my point of view it's a series because the patches are related (I
> > did a git format-patch from my local branch). But for the maintainers
> > point of view, they are individual patches.
> 
> And the maintainers view is what matters here, if you wish to get your
> patches reviewed and accepted...

Mainly I'd just like to know which you're asking for.  Do you want me to
apply this, or to ACK it so someone else can?  If it's sent as a series
I tend to assume the latter.

But in this case I'm assuming it's the former, so I'll pick up the nfsd
one....

--b.

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[Jérémy Lefaure]

On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 15:22:24 -0400
bfields@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) wrote:

> Mainly I'd just like to know which you're asking for.  Do you want me to
> apply this, or to ACK it so someone else can?  If it's sent as a series
> I tend to assume the latter.
> 
> But in this case I'm assuming it's the former, so I'll pick up the nfsd
> one....
Could you to apply the NFSD patch ("nfsd: use ARRAY_SIZE") with the
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>) tag please ?

This patch is an individual patch and it should not have been sent in a
series (sorry about that).

Thank you,
Jérémy

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Openipmi-developer mailing list
Openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer

Re: [PATCH 00/18] use ARRAY_SIZE macro

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 09:33:12PM -0400, Jérémy Lefaure wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 15:22:24 -0400
> bfields@fieldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) wrote:
> 
> > Mainly I'd just like to know which you're asking for.  Do you want me to
> > apply this, or to ACK it so someone else can?  If it's sent as a series
> > I tend to assume the latter.
> > 
> > But in this case I'm assuming it's the former, so I'll pick up the nfsd
> > one....
> Could you to apply the NFSD patch ("nfsd: use ARRAY_SIZE") with the
> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>) tag please ?
> 
> This patch is an individual patch and it should not have been sent in a
> series (sorry about that).

Applying for 4.15, thanks.--b.