On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Måns Rullgård <[email protected]> wrote: > Christian Riesch <[email protected]> writes: [...]>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c >> index 2e900a9..b09f326 100644 >> --- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c >> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c >> @@ -321,7 +321,9 @@ static void n_tty_check_unthrottle(struct tty_struct >> *tty) >> >> static inline void put_tty_queue(unsigned char c, struct n_tty_data *ldata) >> { >> - *read_buf_addr(ldata, ldata->read_head++) = c; >> + *read_buf_addr(ldata, ldata->read_head) = c; >> + /* increment read_head _after_ placing the character in the buffer */ >> + ldata->read_head++; >> } > > Is that comment really necessary?
No, I am pretty sure that removing the comment would not break the code ;-) I just thought it would be good to have some kind of reminder here. Otherwise someone may think: Hey, it would be a good idea to do the increment right in the first line. And submit a patch for it. But I am also ok with removing the comment. So if you like me to post a v3 without the comment, I'll be happy to do that. Christian -- 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/
