From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 845D41EA84; Mon, 16 Mar 2026 14:16:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.8 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773670582; cv=none; b=P0ehC64iMokyi8taKW07M5oR6+Fr1lPcTmO95vWPan4PNWOl+du7B6zfRkrv+aA3Cl7eMcl+xP1U8CA/AgQt5HRk2ltqD2cmJnwOa1+EaSXXnBLr5kZbwEwrGhqtqAS3qKETFsP82NhsAz8+IjdbYSWL+jSOz2TVRoHCMU5vNK0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773670582; c=relaxed/simple; bh=3Hjo2MlecQsEGeH0hojUTgkE8q+MTxgcfe7/iPoRn8E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cceiIgopQMdAgIDksp+I2M1XfamTLhOO9GxbQgStlDBL9PwSKituKWLnaW1sjD9KLrnYpH/4UbHf1d6S8fm65x1kWI3skQtQccFJ2F7Q2Sv6EF6I6sdxQtP84g9wWrymkRDiIqPUU5fjCNJiac8b/B4QFjuycrOch/YiLQ6FzY8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=hv0ODtDc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.8 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="hv0ODtDc" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1773670581; x=1805206581; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=3Hjo2MlecQsEGeH0hojUTgkE8q+MTxgcfe7/iPoRn8E=; b=hv0ODtDcYFr8Hn2u64IvP08MQHLncqXB5mz+TNKmsj1ZxBD1c9XpiB5Q P4IZbheRVzb120wj2KoB0XI7qYfL5glxOBKSGdY/mTwB+zLZ2kthjixtl CAmOXg1BV0ei0500xGtlmiX1q22P3WvENeUOskrj2Y5KrV+g04+F8n1e5 NJmcsPf/ZdP1WpUfeCaYNLFMbnlILxZf0u4zpiDQLbUm+8Bfa3HibCpZV QQ4lH+1Yi6LRUHfLfNH/dh0TModCa0g7nWB8DK1RDkl8vX5JGKliY8V6G geCnsDLjPByeiwnzxhqLZI6FAFYObqbvb9JAvbC347uAy56MmqvSv9gfJ A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: ROycwCyITTeIqH0/X+WeSQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Z1XW+0OWSY2rArql1Y+Ugw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11731"; a="92252886" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,124,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="92252886" Received: from fmviesa002.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.142]) by fmvoesa102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Mar 2026 07:16:20 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: zbLDzW3jQUOOB29LkC+iWw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: xW6eNhA2QZ+qGvzF0he6uQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,124,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="244956417" Received: from vpanait-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.237]) by fmviesa002-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Mar 2026 07:16:18 -0700 Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2026 16:16:15 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Rosen Penev Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Peter Rosin , Jonathan Cameron , David Lechner , Nuno =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= , Andy Shevchenko , open list Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: iio-mux: use flexible array member Message-ID: References: <20260315224509.48111-1-rosenp@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260315224509.48111-1-rosenp@gmail.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Sun, Mar 15, 2026 at 03:45:09PM -0700, Rosen Penev wrote: > Allows using struct_size to simplify allocation slightly. > > Removes a pointer from the struct. ... > - sizeof_priv = sizeof(*mux); > - sizeof_priv += sizeof(*mux->child) * children; > + sizeof_priv = struct_size(mux, child, children); > sizeof_priv += sizeof(*mux->chan) * children; There are two arrays that are allocated at the end of the same object. Why is mux better than the chan? I rather would see two times array_size() than the above. > sizeof_priv += sizeof_ext_info; -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko