Re: md/raid1: Improve another size determination in setup_conf()

[Jes Sorensen]

SF Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>> Replace the specification of a data structure by a pointer dereference
>>>> as the parameter for the operator "sizeof" to make the corresponding size
>>>> determination a bit safer.
>>>
>>> Isn't this pure matter of taste?
>>> Some developers prefer sizeof(*ptr) because it is easier to type, other
>>> developers prefer sizeof(struct foo) because you can determine the type
>>> at first sight and makes review more easy.
>> 
>> sizeof(*ptr) is more future proof and normally more obvious and easier
>> to review.
>
> Is it interesting to see how different the software development opinions
> can be for such an implementation detail?
>
>> That said, I've tried to tell Markus to only send bugfix patches
>
> Can any deviations from the Linux coding style become "bugs" also in
> your view of the software situation?
>
>> because these are a waste of time
>
> How do you value compliance with coding styles?

The Linux Coding Style is not a law, nor is it at all perfect. You
clearly misunderstood how Linux development work and you are doing a
great job wasting everyone's time with this patchset.

Jes