2017-05-31 16:57 GMT+02:00 Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>: > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]> wrote: >> 2017-05-30 20:55 GMT+02:00 Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>: >>> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> We currently shift bits here and there without actually explaining >>>> what we're doing. Add some helper variables with names indicating >>>> their purpose to improve the code readability. >>> >>>> + /* Each chip is described by two values. */ >>>> + num_chips = gpio_mockup_params_nr / 2; >>>> + >>>> + chips = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*chips) * num_chips, GFP_KERNEL); >>> >>> It's effectively >>> devm_kcalloc() >>> or >>> devm_kmalloc_array() >>> depending on the requirement of zeroing a memory chunks. > >> Is there any advantage to using one of these here? > > Yes, though subtle one in this case. The caller will not care about > (possible) overflow in multiplication. > Other (micro)optimizations might be in place in the future as well, > but I dunno about this. > > I would suggest to change. >
Ok, I'll change it both for the lines and for the chips arrays and add a separate patch. Thanks, Bartosz
