From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Miaoqian Lin <linmq006@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/cputable: Use pointer from memcpy() call for assignment in set_cur_cpu_spec()
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 12:48:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <36c855fe-9a04-4e83-8e0c-641e2d7e3df9@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3115e03a-1995-46f4-a902-47ba3cb99901@csgroup.eu>
>> A pointer was assigned to a variable. The same pointer was used for
>> the destination parameter of a memcpy() call.
>> This function is documented in the way that the same value is returned.
>> Thus convert two separate statements into a direct variable assignment for
>> the return value from a memory copy action.
>
> I can't see the added value of this change. For me it degrades readability.
I dared to present another coding style view.
> Many places in cputable.c have that t = PTRRELOC(t) pattern,
Several assignment statements can occur.
> I can't see why that one should be changed while other ones remain.
Copy calls influenced the suggested source code transformation.
> Can you elaborate why this change is desirable ?
I imagine that selected variable assignments might be avoidable.
Regards,
Markus
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-04 11:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-30 20:15 Markus Elfring
2025-11-04 9:34 ` Christophe Leroy
2025-11-04 11:48 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=36c855fe-9a04-4e83-8e0c-641e2d7e3df9@web.de \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linmq006@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®