Hi Rouven,
On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 09:12:37AM +0200, Rouven Czerwinski wrote:
> Instead of overwriting the whole hierarchy beneath a globalvar, the
> set_single function only sets the specific globalvar.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rouven Czerwinski <r.czerwinski@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> common/globalvar.c | 11 +++++++++++
> include/globalvar.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/common/globalvar.c b/common/globalvar.c
> index 98a028a68a..848a7d6832 100644
> --- a/common/globalvar.c
> +++ b/common/globalvar.c
> @@ -399,6 +399,17 @@ void globalvar_set_match(const char *match, const char *val)
> }
> }
>
> +void globalvar_set_single(const char *match, const char *val)
> +{
> + struct param_d *param;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(param, &global_device.parameters, list) {
> + if (!strncmp(match, param->name, strlen(match))
> + && strlen(match) == strlen(param->name))
What's the difference between this construct and plain strcmp()?
> + dev_set_param(&global_device, param->name, val);
And then, why not call dev_set_param directly with "match" as argument?
I would rename "match" to "name" as it describes a single variable name.
Also "globalvar_set" is IMO enough as a function name.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
