Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 3/26/22 11:59, Benjamin Stürz wrote:
>> This replaces comments with C99's designated
>> initializers because the kernel supports them now.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Stürz <benni@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c | 40 +++++++++++------------
>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c
>> index 684583955511..3c83a0bfb120 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/coex.c
>> @@ -97,26 +97,26 @@ static const struct rtw89_btc_fbtc_slot s_def[] = {
>> };
>> static const u32 cxtbl[] = {
>> - 0xffffffff, /* 0 */
>> - 0xaaaaaaaa, /* 1 */
>> - 0x55555555, /* 2 */
>> - 0x66555555, /* 3 */
>> - 0x66556655, /* 4 */
>> - 0x5a5a5a5a, /* 5 */
>> - 0x5a5a5aaa, /* 6 */
>> - 0xaa5a5a5a, /* 7 */
>> - 0x6a5a5a5a, /* 8 */
>> - 0x6a5a5aaa, /* 9 */
>> - 0x6a5a6a5a, /* 10 */
>> - 0x6a5a6aaa, /* 11 */
>> - 0x6afa5afa, /* 12 */
>> - 0xaaaa5aaa, /* 13 */
>> - 0xaaffffaa, /* 14 */
>> - 0xaa5555aa, /* 15 */
>> - 0xfafafafa, /* 16 */
>> - 0xffffddff, /* 17 */
>> - 0xdaffdaff, /* 18 */
>> - 0xfafadafa /* 19 */
>> + [0] = 0xffffffff,
>> + [1] = 0xaaaaaaaa,
>> + [2] = 0x55555555,
>> + [3] = 0x66555555,
>> + [4] = 0x66556655,
>> + [5] = 0x5a5a5a5a,
>> + [6] = 0x5a5a5aaa,
>> + [7] = 0xaa5a5a5a,
>> + [8] = 0x6a5a5a5a,
>> + [9] = 0x6a5a5aaa,
>> + [10] = 0x6a5a6a5a,
>> + [11] = 0x6a5a6aaa,
>> + [12] = 0x6afa5afa,
>> + [13] = 0xaaaa5aaa,
>> + [14] = 0xaaffffaa,
>> + [15] = 0xaa5555aa,
>> + [16] = 0xfafafafa,
>> + [17] = 0xffffddff,
>> + [18] = 0xdaffdaff,
>> + [19] = 0xfafadafa
>> };
>> struct rtw89_btc_btf_tlv {
>
>
> Is this change really necessary? Yes, the entries must be ordered;
> however, the comment carries that information at very few extra
> characters. To me, this patch looks like unneeded source churn.
One small benefit I see is to avoid the comment index being wrong and
there would be no way to catch that. But otherwise I don't have any
opinion about this.
--
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
