On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 18:55:17 +0200 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 11:41:03AM -0500, Hugo Villeneuve wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 17:50:34 +0200 > > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 12:18:53PM -0500, Hugo Villeneuve wrote: > > ... > > > > > - if (count < 0 || count > ARRAY_SIZE(irda_port)) > > > > + if (count < 0 || count > SC16IS7XX_MAX_PORTS) > > > > > > ARRAY_SIZE() is more robust than this. What if you change to support different > > > devices where this won't be as defined? > > > > not sure that I understand your point, because SC16IS7XX_MAX_PORTS is > > the maximum for all devices supported by this driver. The irda_port > > array always has a fixed number of elements set to SC16IS7XX_MAX_PORTS, > > even if the device that we are probing has only one port for example. > > For current models of the device, yes. Who knows the future? > Also, ARRAY_SIZE() make it less points to update if ever needed. > > > But I can change it back to ARRAY_SIZE(irda_port) if you want. > > Please change it back. > > > > > return; > > ... > > > > > + WARN_ON(devtype->nr_uart > SC16IS7XX_MAX_PORTS); > > > > > > Not sure about this, perhaps it's fine. > > > > This check is only there if we add support for a new device and we > > incorrectly set nr_uart to an incorrect value, which will cause other > > problems anyway, of course :) > > > > This could be removed. > > Let's remove. We can add it back in case something like this (quite unlikely) > happens. Ok, will do both for v2. Hugo Villeneuve
