Hi Bastien,
On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 11:51 AM Bastien Nocera <hadess@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2024-05-30 at 19:57 +0300, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > to, 2024-05-30 kello 16:58 +0200, Bastien Nocera kirjoitti:
> > > Don't manipulate the "req" structs as if they were flat arrays,
> > > static
> > > analysis and humans are both equally confused by this kind of
> > > usage.
> >
> > struct start_req {
> > union {
> > struct seid required[1];
> > struct seid seids[0];
> > };
> > } __attribute__ ((packed));
> >
> > and access only via req->seids?
>
> That's a good idea, I'll give it a try.
>
> > <snip>
> > > +#define
> > > REQ_GET_NTH_SEID(x) \
> > > + static struct seid
> > > * \
> > > + x##_req_get_nth_seid(struct x##_req *req, int count, int
> > > i) \
> > > + {
> > > \
> > > + if (count == 0 || i >=
> > > count) \
> > > + return
> > > NULL; \
> > > + if (i ==
> > > 1) \
> > > + return &req-
> > > >first_seid; \
> > > + return &req-
> > > >other_seids[i]; \
> >
> > (i == 0) and [i - 1]?
>
> *facepalm*
>
> Yes, this will need a v2, thanks for spotting that.
Ive applied the set except for this one, please resend once you are
done with the suggested changes.
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
