On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 6:12 AM, Darren Hart <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 09:12:38PM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote: >> The rfkill notifier node names are used in three different places. As a >> matter of style, it is better to store them somewhere and have the >> compiler warn us about typos in the function arguments. >> >> Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <[email protected]> >> --- >> drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c | 22 +++++++++++++--------- >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c >> b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c >> index 6e3be01..e92ea41 100644 >> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c >> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c >> @@ -819,11 +819,15 @@ static int eeepc_new_rfkill(struct eeepc_laptop *eeepc, >> return 0; >> } >> >> +static char EEEPC_RFKILL_NODE_1[] = "\\_SB.PCI0.P0P5"; >> +static char EEEPC_RFKILL_NODE_2[] = "\\_SB.PCI0.P0P6"; >> +static char EEEPC_RFKILL_NODE_3[] = "\\_SB.PCI0.P0P7"; > > So, out of curiosity, any particular reason for static char[] instead of > #define? I see both used frequently and didn't see any advice in CodingStyle.
My expectation is that this is more likely to produce a smaller binary, but I have no measurements on that to back me up. I was a bit annoyed by the fact that the acpi functions take a char* instead of a const char*. I would have preferred static const char[] in any case. Thanks, Frans -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
