On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 5:05 PM Satya Priya Kakitapalli <quic_skakitap@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 03:07:02PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > Wed, May 08, 2024 at 10:37:50PM +0000, Stephen Boyd kirjoitti: > > > > Quoting Johan Hovold (2024-05-06 08:08:29) ... > > > > > + BUILD_BUG_ON((ARRAY_SIZE(pldo_ranges) != 1) || > > > > > > > > This should be an && not || right? > > > > > > > > + (ARRAY_SIZE(nldo_ranges) != 1)); > > > > > > In any case BUILD_BUG_ON() is not encouraged for such cases, it would be much > > > better to have a static_assert() near to one of those arrays. > > > > I think the reason it is placed here is that the above line reads: > > > > rdesc->n_linear_ranges = 1; > > > > and that would need to change if anyone expands the arrays. > > Correct. static_assert() cannot be used in the middle of code here, it can only be used at the declarations part which doesn't serve the purpose. I didn't get this. The ARRAY_SIZE():s are defined at compile time globally. How does this prevent from using static_assert()? > So, BUILD_BUG_ON is the only way to go here. I don't think so. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
