From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72E83C433E0 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 19:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 296E0206A5 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 19:30:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="ppl+Hz6x" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390661AbgEMTag (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2020 15:30:36 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55380 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389529AbgEMTaf (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 May 2020 15:30:35 -0400 Received: from mail-vs1-xe43.google.com (mail-vs1-xe43.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e43]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67361C061A0C for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 12:30:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vs1-xe43.google.com with SMTP id a5so507232vsm.7 for ; Wed, 13 May 2020 12:30:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=nvAm/RWsLWbKrXl5wYkqUN/QzLWfdBhUymqYm03ttX4=; b=ppl+Hz6xL+fhqkkVJQFWJbx0QenXfFeKY1eJ8uOqNGG2nZOpAEDb9TeXcOu29d4igL 7YojyOwmfBwz25EHRDtsqLeqBld8JPCJCEoTBdIDQO7XFlgbxDLe4o2GYkPRz8gkbGij IKV4+foVorv2NXvyE72bwBbq59N/BwIgfLteaewKSpb9X/dNEXwACTxY3QDBz1r9Vgcs uVWPdCN73NInYkvxmXG9Va8oJq14SjKuU+mR0qmodP0Hf6v9Uy34M0mZ8AhsaJTvVr12 eli6mJJfEeWIDrq7sAeryoot1UQ1GYqKrKG5Caa3enKcn5CVv9Uk8fn1HCb5BzEarxRq ZWMw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=nvAm/RWsLWbKrXl5wYkqUN/QzLWfdBhUymqYm03ttX4=; b=KR76NwZGmxGz/2GU6Vl3ymPerwpbsHNa2JoOt1ExQxkuc8IEnjNXUtptMJIEoFf7ap tVFMzRLY2AS3T7dDc4HLRii3Jh2mFGehN1KZLutTlNR+lBqmmiApQ0QPHmbqF0gltRWj GEY0IPnxL1bS1k5eei/clg+EQBiORExjQWHDGWk9TDoUtXS6iw3Fe6XBucyciQLOzv3x jESBIoAfQnosmivDgACdEx4/phPmf7G5sezSrPdjq6LQVZMOvxDZ+WtllJF4CfPTg/G/ PF0AZlZPwrLeSDfhQb8Fe88JAJQp8XUgZDBGOHLH6rZK16uiE5ONVIDGAl99Z71PSu9V yQiQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532dH3FJn9scJvruEkVEKMzWHwEJrrPq7KPbkMymcdnJbYrL9TOd KiZFeat8FKm5RTmwyETlZf1FGza6g2Von6vPYcA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzzkYUHJKEqruQ614QuZ0kic/EauThdWglxClyDdB4iUPyICElfW45XAFK7WtSXapbQovI0HlHFQyYrdvmMh+Y= X-Received: by 2002:a67:b91a:: with SMTP id q26mr659583vsn.118.1589398234149; Wed, 13 May 2020 12:30:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200513005424.81369-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <20200513005424.81369-4-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> In-Reply-To: <20200513005424.81369-4-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_=C3=85gren?= Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 21:30:23 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/44] connect: have ref processing code take struct packet_reader To: "brian m. carlson" Cc: Git Mailing List , Jonathan Tan Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 02:56, brian m. carlson wrote: > > In a future patch, we'll want to access multiple members from struct > packet_reader when parsing references. Therefore, have the ref parsing > code take pointers to struct reader instead of having to pass multiple > arguments to each function. Makes sense. > -static void process_capabilities(const char *line, int *len) > +static void process_capabilities(struct packet_reader *reader, int *len) > { > + const char *line = reader->line; > int nul_location = strlen(line); > if (nul_location == *len) > return; "line+len" made it pretty obvious that they belonged together. "reader+len" not so much. Your patch does minimize the change. Would s/len/linelen/ be worth the extra churn? Possibly not. Right now, at least we're pretty consistent about using "len" -- if this ends up as a mixture of "linelen" and "len" I think it's worse, overall. Martin