On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 09:07:27PM +0200, Martin Wilck wrote:
> 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?
Reviewed-by: Benjamin Marzinski <bmarz...@redhat.com>
>
> Thanks,
> Martin
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
