Hi Andy,
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 04:23:10PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Besides 0 not being, strictly speaking, a pointer it's redundant after
> the actual terminator NULL entry. Drop the former for good.
It seems to me that there is confusion caused by the absence of
the field names:
> static struct notifier_block panel_notifier = {
> panel_notify_sys,
=> this is notifier_fn_t notifier_call
> - NULL,
=> this is struct notifier_block __rcu *next
> - 0
=> this is int priority
> + NULL
So all values look OK, however they're terribly confusing. wouldn't you
prefer to propose a patch to name them instead ? This would be safer,
especially if the structure evolves in the future.
Thanks!
Willy
On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 5:27 PM Willy Tarreau <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 04:23:10PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Besides 0 not being, strictly speaking, a pointer it's redundant after
> > the actual terminator NULL entry. Drop the former for good.
>
> It seems to me that there is confusion caused by the absence of
> the field names
My gosh, you are right!
v2 on its way, thanks for review!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko