On 23-07-2014 13:48:11, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 03:14:10PM +0200, Matthias Beyer wrote: > > This patch outsources a chunk of code into an own function. It also > > refactors the variable names which are used within this function. > > > > The function name may be not appropriate. > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Beyer <m...@beyermatthias.de> > > --- > > drivers/staging/bcm/nvm.c | 70 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/bcm/nvm.c b/drivers/staging/bcm/nvm.c > > index 76c86eb..4aa195c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/staging/bcm/nvm.c > > +++ b/drivers/staging/bcm/nvm.c > > @@ -1033,6 +1033,44 @@ static ULONG BcmFlashUnProtectBlock(struct > > bcm_mini_adapter *Adapter, unsigned i > > return ulStatus; > > } > > > > +static int bulk_read_complete_sector(struct bcm_mini_adapter *ad, > > + UCHAR read_bk[], > > + PCHAR tmpbuff, > > + unsigned int offset, > > + unsigned int partoff, > > + unsigned int i) > > "i" should just be a local variable here. > > Could you send a follow on patch to clean that up? > > Also this code has that disease that every variable is "unsigned int". > It can't go higher than MAX_SECTOR_SIZE. It should just be "int" and > the same for "j" because that is a number between 0-15. > > regards, > dan carpenter >
sure I can, but the variable which is named 'i' in the argument list is passed from the calling function where it is an unsigned int! Should I fix this up, too? I agree with you that the name is inappropriate, though! -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Kind regards, Matthias Beyer Proudly sent with mutt. Happily signed with gnupg.
pgpn_0AgGatOs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
