On 14.04.2015 10:40, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:47:38PM +0200, Mateusz Kulikowski wrote:
>> + if (*rfa_pti_r > 4) {
>> + (*rfa_pti_r)--;
>
>
> Honestly, I thought that patch 14 was too hard to review and did too
> many things, but this one is kind of ridiculous.
>
> - p->rfa_txpowertrackingindex--;
> + (*rfa_pti)--;
>
> The new version is fewer characters but it's way more complicated to
> think about. Just rename rfa_txpowertrackingindex to something
> reasonable. It's a stupid name, because it_hasninegazillionwordsinit
> and it's too long.
>
> "rfa_pti_r" is a terrible name as well. it_also_hngwit_for_realz.
True, but it's also used as local variable in one-screen function;
Nevertheless - I got the point.
> I'm not going to review the rest of this patch.
Thanks for the patience, I will try to split such commits more in future.
As for v3 I assume patches 15, 19, 20 should be reworked; I will:
- Try to find better names for structure members where possible (this mostly
applies to r8192_priv members),
- Do exactly one type of cleanup 'operation' in each commit (this means fixing
one LONG_LINE warning may take more than one commit)
- Avoid playing with pointers like above
- Standardize local variable names in all functions (i.e. if I use igain as
init_gain pointer, I'll do it like that everywhere)
Is it enough or did I missed something?
Regards,
Mateusz
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
