On Thu 2017-03-30 14:55:46, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > On (03/28/17 14:56), Petr Mladek wrote: > [..] > > > > Is it better? If not, I will send a version with console_cmdline_last. > > > > > > personally I'm fine with the nested loop. the latest version > > > "for (last = MAX_CMDLINECONSOLES - 1; last >= 0;..." > > > > > > is even easier to read. > > > > The number of elements is bumped on a single location, so there > > is not much to synchronize. The old approach was fine because > > the for cycles were needed anyway, they started on the 0th element, > > and NULL ended arrays are rather common practice. > > > > But we are searching the array from the end now. Also we use the > > for cycle just to get the number here. This is not a common > > practice and it makes the code more complicated and strange from > > my point of view. > > I'm fine with either way :) Alekesey, any chance to use the global variable to count used or point to the last element? I know that you have already spent a lot of time with it. It was great work. But the current solution of the cycle looks weird to me. Best Regards, Petr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
