Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1660934107.git.mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
 <a29493f594c84b3bd852e462bbd3e591a8575a27.1660934107.git.mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
 <20220820122120.57dddcab@jic23-huawei> <412c5d22-d59b-9191-80dd-e3ca11360bc4@gmail.com>
 <CAHp75VdoKtc2QqFcDuJ00KBz6mjg0fnM_WhyVqhCmDVo_3K6kg@mail.gmail.com> <01fec744-f3d4-b633-d3ce-bcd86a153132@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <01fec744-f3d4-b633-d3ce-bcd86a153132@gmail.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 20 Aug 2022 20:41:39 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vd3vyAZbWpZT9SmyD=ecGTAdVNWK=fs_n4OSAqGtGj_gg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/14] iio: ltc2688: Simplify using devm_regulator_*get_enable()
To:     Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
        Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?TnVubyBTw6E=?= <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 8:30 PM Matti Vaittinen
<mazziesaccount@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/20/22 19:09, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 4:45 PM Matti Vaittinen
> > <mazziesaccount@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On 8/20/22 14:21, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 22:19:17 +0300
> >>> Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com> wrote:

...

> >>> For the whole static / vs non static. My personal preference is not
> >>> to have the static marking but I don't care that much.
> >>
> >> I'd like to stick with the static here. I know this one particular array
> >> does not have much of a footprint - but I'd like to encourage the habit
> >> of considering the memory usage. This discussion serves as an example of
> >> how unknown the impact of making const data static is. I didn't know
> >> this myself until Sebastian educated me :)  Hence my strong preference
> >> on keeping this 'static' as an example for others who are as ignorant as
> >> I were ;) After all, having const data arrays static is quite an easy
> >> way of improving things - and it really does matter when there is many
> >> of arrays - or when they contain large data.
> >
> > But still the same comment about global scope of the variable is applied.
>
> I don't understand why you keep claiming the variable is global when it
> is not?

It is. The static keyword makes it global, but putting the entire
definition into the function is asking for troubles.

I guess some C standard chapter describes that in non-understandable language.

> > As I explained before, hiding global variables inside a function is a
> > bad code practice.
>
> I don't really get what you mean here. And I definitely don't see any
> improvement if we would really use a global variable instead of a local one.

The improvement is avoid hiding the global variable to the local namespace.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko