On Wed, 2023-09-13 at 09:38 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote: > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 03:53:25PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 18:00 -0500, Benjamin Marzinski wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 06:38:31PM +0200, mwi...@suse.com wrote: > > > > + */ > > > > +static int alias_compar(const void *p1, const void *p2) > > > > +{ > > > > > > I'm confused as to why we need to pass p1 and p2 and pointers to > > > pointers to chars, instead of simply as pointers to chars. We > > > always > > > derefence them immediately, and only use the dereferenced > > > pointers. > > > Am I > > > missing something? > > > > I wanted to make the relationship of alias_compar() and > > mp_alias_compar() as obvious as possible. mp_alias_compar() takes > > (struct mpentry **) arguments, because it's used as an argument to > > vector_sort() aka msort(), which has the same calling convention as > > qsort()'s "compar" argument. Therefore I wrote alias_compar() such > > that > > it takes (char **) pointers. This way we could use alias_compar() > > as an > > argument to vector_sort() as well, even though we currently don't. > > > > > > Does this make sense? If not, I can change it, but I think the > > function > > should not be named alias_compar() if it can't be passed to > > vector_sort(). > > It's fine as it is. I was just confused as to why.
Can I take this as a reviewed-by? Thanks, Martin -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel