Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752621AbcJJNLC (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:11:02 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42684 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752500AbcJJNJW (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:09:22 -0400 From: Jes Sorensen To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Richard Weinberger , SF Markus Elfring , "linux-raid\@vger.kernel.org" , Christoph Hellwig , Guoqing Jiang , Jens Axboe , Mike Christie , Neil Brown , Shaohua Li , Tomasz Majchrzak , LKML , "kernel-janitors\@vger.kernel.org" , Julia Lawall Subject: Re: [PATCH 24/54] md/raid1: Improve another size determination in setup_conf() References: <566ABCD9.1060404@users.sourceforge.net> <786843ef-4b6f-eb04-7326-2f6f5b408826@users.sourceforge.net> <9831fce9-d689-89e4-dec8-50cadcd13fdd@users.sourceforge.net> <20161007075345.GB6039@mwanda> Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:09:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20161007075345.GB6039@mwanda> (Dan Carpenter's message of "Fri, 7 Oct 2016 10:53:45 +0300") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.26]); Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:09:22 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1398 Lines: 30 Dan Carpenter writes: > 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 >> wrote: >> > From: Markus Elfring >> > 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. This is totally a matter of taste. I for one find it way easier to review something which says 'sizeof(struct ....)' because it stands out more. I am curious what you mean by it being more future proof - if the code says 'struct foo' in the sizeof argument, what is the problem? The one area where there is a higher risk is if the type is changed, but that is outweighed by the fact the spelled out version is easier to review. Jes