Hi Andy,
> > Here, the initialization to 0 is missing, so some values are broken.
>
> Yes, and this is fine. They are not being used. So, the idea is, whenever we
> pass "false" as a parameter to the function we must take care of all fields we
> are using.
Can be argued. Still, uninitialized values look a little sloppy IMO. I
had a patch on top of this series to print the generated values as debug
output, and '0' looks much more intentional there.
> > Why don't we just drop the pointer and init the array directly?
> >
> > struct i2c_timings t = {
> > .bus_freq_hz = ...
> > ...
> > }
>
> I can do it if you think it's better. I have no strong opinion here.
> From code prospective I guess it will be something similar anyway.
I like it better. Easier to read in the code, no need for a seperate
pointer. I can fix it locally here, though.
Thanks!
Wolfram
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
