Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Allocate buffer on heap rather than globally

[Pali RohÃr]

On Wednesday 31 January 2018 18:53:19 Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 6:46 PM,  <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >> > for allocation: ..._alloc_request()
> >> > for filling: _fill_request() / _prepare_request()
> >> >
> >> > or alike.
> >> >
> >> > _set_arguments() not good enough to me.
> >>
> >> Ok. Then we need to stick with 5 arguments... What about name
> >> dell_fill_request()? E.g.
> >>
> >>   struct calling_interface_buffer buffer;
> >>   dell_fill_request(&buffer, 0x2, 0, 0, 0);
> >>   ret = dell_send_request(&buffer, CLASS_INFO, SELECT_RFKILL);
> >>
> >
> > The other alternative is to just define the input of the structure immediately with
> > an initializer, no multi argument filler function.  Like this:
> 
> Either would work for me, though one comment below.
> 
> > -       struct calling_interface_buffer buffer;
> 
> 
> > +       struct calling_interface_buffer buffer = {CLASS_INFO,
> > +                                                 SELECT_RFKILL,
> > +                                                 {0, 0, 0, 0},
> > +                                                 {0, 0, 0, 0}};
> 
> Looking to this approach I would rather provide a macro then.
> 
> #define FILL_REQUEST(a,b,c,d,...) \ // variant FILL_RFKILL_REQUEST(a,b,c,d)
> (struct calling_interface_buffer) { \
>  ... \
> }
> 
> But then it is macro(s) vs. function(s) debate.

Does not matter, I'm fine with either macro or function.

> 
> > -       dell_set_arguments(&buffer, 0, 0, 0, 0);
> > -       ret = dell_send_request(&buffer, CLASS_INFO, SELECT_RFKILL);
> > +       ret = dell_send_request(&buffer);
> 

-- 
Pali RohÃr
pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature