On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 02:42:52PM +0400, Ilya Matveychikov wrote: > > > On Aug 21, 2017, at 1:46 PM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I wasn't sure how get_options() worked, so I looked at examples. And by > > sheer chance the first example I picked the only example which uses it > > incorrectly... I've added some comments that hopefully help. > > > > See also comments on my patch from Ben Hutchings: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9811617/ Ugh... The implementation of get_options() looks gnarly, yes. That affects the part of my comment which says: + * string. It stores the number of numbers as the first element in the + * array. If we are going to keep the current behavior then we should specify that ints[0] can be higher than "nints - 1". But I feel like the current behavior is wrong and that get_range() should never return more than n. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
