On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 01:33:55PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 5/16/19 8:57 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > +static void srp_rename_dev(struct ib_device *device, void *client_data)
> > +{
> > + struct srp_device *srp_dev = client_data;
> > + struct srp_host *host, *tmp_host;
> > +> + list_for_each_entry_safe(host, tmp_host, &srp_dev->dev_list, list) {
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Would list_for_each_entry() have been sufficient?
I assumed that if it is enough for srp_remove_one, it will be enough for
rename too.
>
> > + char name[IB_DEVICE_NAME_MAX * 8];
>
> Why "* 8"? Would "+ 8" have been sufficient?
Typo
>
> Otherwise this patch looks good to me. This patch also passes the tests
> I ran.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bart.
>
