Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1756313AbcJGHyr (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 7 Oct 2016 03:54:47 -0400
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:35520 "EHLO
        aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752621AbcJGHyi (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 7 Oct 2016 03:54:38 -0400
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 10:53:45 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com>
Cc: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>,
        "linux-raid@vger.kernel.org" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Guoqing Jiang <gqjiang@suse.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>, Mike Christie <mchristi@redhat.com>,
        Neil Brown <neilb@suse.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>,
        Tomasz Majchrzak <tomasz.majchrzak@intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/54] md/raid1: Improve another size determination in
 setup_conf()
Message-ID: <20161007075345.GB6039@mwanda>
References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net>
 <786843ef-4b6f-eb04-7326-2f6f5b408826@users.sourceforge.net>
 <9831fce9-d689-89e4-dec8-50cadcd13fdd@users.sourceforge.net>
 <CAFLxGvx0Fr-WNvKYACdvNiZwYzHW4ocna9HPH8J_WPSXWc+ngg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAFLxGvx0Fr-WNvKYACdvNiZwYzHW4ocna9HPH8J_WPSXWc+ngg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 916
Lines: 21

On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 11:29:20AM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 11:22 AM, SF Markus Elfring
> <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
> > Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 21:46:18 +0200
> >
> > Replace the specification of a data structure by a pointer dereference
> > as the parameter for the operator "sizeof" to make the corresponding size
> > determination a bit safer.
> 
> Isn't this pure matter of taste?
> Some developers prefer sizeof(*ptr) because it is easier to type, other
> developers prefer sizeof(struct foo) because you can determine the type
> at first sight and makes review more easy.

sizeof(*ptr) is more future proof and normally more obvious and easier
to review.  That said, I've tried to tell Markus to only send bugfix
patches because these are a waste of time and regularly introduce bugs.

regards,
dan carpenter