On Monday, November 24, 2014 04:01:24 PM Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> On 24.11.2014 16:16, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday, November 24, 2014 09:34:24 AM Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> >> On 24.11.2014 02:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>> On Friday, October 17, 2014 09:36:59 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >>>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> It is very useful to traverse all available table entries without max
> >>>> number of expected entries type. Current acpi_parse_entries()
> >>>> implementation gives that feature but it does not count those entries,
> >>>> it returns 0 instead, so fix it to count matched and successfully
> >>>> entries and return it.
> >>>
> >>> Hmm. I guess that the goal is for count to only be incremented when the
> >>> condition is satisfied entirely, while without the patch it may be incremented
> >>> even if that isn't the case.
> >>
> >> That would be our goal if patch would look like:
> >> - && (!max_entries || count++ < max_entries))
> >> + && (!max_entries && count++ < max_entries)) {
> >> but then we can not walk through all available entries (with max_entries==0)
> >
> > No, that's not what I was trying to say. :-)
> >
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure how that is related to the above paragraph, however.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Previous changelog is not clear, let me rewrite it:
> >>
> >> acpi_parse_entries() allows to traverse all available table entries (aka
> >> subtables) by passing max_entries parameter equal to 0. But for that use
> >> case acpi_parse_entries() does not inform caller how many entries were
> >> matched and for how many entries handler was run against. That patch is
> >> going to fix it.
> >
> > Do I understand correctly that count is only ever incremented by current code
> > if max_entries is different from 0?
>
> Right. Currently "count" is incremented only if max_entries > 0.
So can you say that in the changelog, please?
Something like:
"acpi_parse_entries() allows to traverse all available table entries (aka
subtables) by passing max_entries parameter equal to 0, but since its count
variable is only incremented if max_entries is not 0, the function always
returns 0 for max_entries equal to 0. It would be more useful if it returned
the number of entries matched instead, so make it increment count in that
case too".
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
