Attention is currently required from: Edward O'Callaghan, Angel Pons, Anastasia Klimchuk.

View Change

3 comments:

• Commit Message:

  • Patch Set #4, Line 24: fresh copy on the stack.

    This made me chuckle a little :) What I always tell people when
    the commit message is a longer list: This list perfectly tells
    us what separate commits this could have been. More, smaller
    commits are usually cheaper.

    But please don't split this one, as it's almost through review ;)

• File tests/chip.c:

  • Patch Set #3, Line 24: #define CHIP_TOTAL_SIZE 8388608

    Wow useful macros. I didn't know of them, probably because I was looking into flashchips. […]

    Makes sense.

  • Patch Set #3, Line 128: static struct flashchip chip_8MiB = {

    Looks good.

    For example, it is not a deep copy.

    Hmmm, let's have a look at that. We also use a shallow copy of the
    entries in the `flashchips.c` list (flashrom.c:787).

    Looking for pointers among the struct members, they are all pointing
    to `const` strings or functions. The strings don't have to, but in this
    case are global i.e. not dynamic memory, same for functions. There's one
    exception, the `wp` member. But I'm not sure if it is non-const on
    purpose. It's part of some WIP development, so I would ignore it for
    now.

To view, visit change 57437. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.