Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpiolib: Deduplicate cleanup for-loop in gpiochip_add_data_with_key()

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 02:40:05PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 2:39 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 02:30:03PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 2:28 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:48:00AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 8:36 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

...

> > > > > > +       while (desc_index--)
> > > > >
> > > > > What about gdev->descs[0]?
> > > >
> > > > What about it? :-)
> > > >
> > > > for (i = i - 1; i >= 0; i--)
> > > > while (--i >= 0)
> > > > while (i--)
> > > >
> > > > are all equivalents.
> > > >
> > > > The difference is what the value will i get _after_ the loop.
> > >
> > > Ugh of course. But the first one is more readable given I got tricked
> > > by variant #3 at a quick glance but the for loop says out loud what it
> > > does.
> >
> > I disagree. `while (i--)` is very well known cleanup pattern.
> > Less letters to parse, easier to understand.
> 
> Whatever, I don't have a strong opinion, just rebase it and resend.

Sure (just will wait to the fix to be settled down first), thanks for review!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko