On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 6:59 PM Stanimir Varbanov <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Tomasz, > > On 07/02/2018 12:23 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 4:06 PM Tomasz Figa <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 1:21 AM Stanimir Varbanov > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi Tomasz, > >>> > >>> On 05/24/2018 05:16 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote: > >>>> Hi Stanimir, > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 5:08 PM Stanimir Varbanov < > > [snip] > >>>> > >>>>> + break; > >>>>> + } > >>>>> + > >>>>> + word++; > >>>>> + words_count--; > >>>> > >>>> If data is at |word + 1|, shouldn’t we increment |word| by |1 + |data > >>>> size||? > >>> > >>> yes, that could be possible but the firmware packets are with variable > >>> data length and don't want to make the code so complex. > >>> > >>> The idea is to search for HFI_PROPERTY_PARAM* key numbers. Yes it is not > >>> optimal but this enumeration is happen only once during driver probe. > >>> > >> > >> Hmm, do we have a guarantee that we will never find a value that > >> matches HFI_PROPERTY_PARAM*, but would be actually just some data > >> inside the payload? > > > > Ping? > > OK, you are right there is guarantee that we not mixing keywords and
Did the auto-correction engine in my head got this correctly as "no guarantee"? :) > data. I can make parse_* functions to return how words they consumed and > increment 'word' pointer with consumed words. Yes, that or maybe just returning the pointer to the first word after consumed data. Most of the looping functions already seem to have this value, so it would have to be just returned. (vs having to subtract from the start pointer) Best regards, Tomasz
