qemu-block
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH 10/31] vvfat: use DIV_ROUND_UP


From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: [Qemu-block] [PATCH 10/31] vvfat: use DIV_ROUND_UP
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2017 06:38:31 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.0

On 06/22/2017 07:41 AM, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> I used the clang-tidy qemu-round check to generate the fix:
> https://github.com/elmarco/clang-tools-extra
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <address@hidden>
> ---
>  block/vvfat.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/vvfat.c b/block/vvfat.c
> index 426ca70e35..877f71dcdc 100644
> --- a/block/vvfat.c
> +++ b/block/vvfat.c
> @@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ static inline direntry_t* 
> create_long_filename(BDRVVVFATState* s,const char* fil
>  {
>      char buffer[258];
>      int length=short2long_name(buffer,filename),
> -        number_of_entries=(length+25)/26,i;
> +        number_of_entries=DIV_ROUND_UP(length, 26),i;

This formatting made me do a double take (at first, I thought it was a
comma expression, before realizing it was a declaration).  While you are
touching it, can you please rewrite it into something more legible, such as:

int length = short2long_name(buffer, filename);
int number_of_entries = DIV_ROUND_UP(length, 26);
int i;

I don't mind declaring multiple variables in one declaration - provided
that we aren't also initializing them.  But mixing in the un-initialized
declaration of 'i' with other initialized variables is just awkward.

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]