patch splitting

[valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:22:40 +1100, "Tobin C. Harding" said:
> Is it easier to review this change for correctness if it is three
> patches or one?
>
> TLDR;
> +	struct wpa_key_t *key = &priv->wpa.key[index];
>
> -	memcpy(&priv->wpa.key[index].rx_seq[0], enc->rx_seq, IW_ENCODE_SEQ_MAX_SIZE);
> +	memcpy(key->rx_seq, enc->rx_seq, IW_ENCODE_SEQ_MAX_SIZE);

One patch for one thing.

> Brief description of steps:
> 1. Add local pointer variable, defined to correct memory location.
> 2. Use newly defined local variable where suitable.
> 3. Remove unnecessary address operator (reasoning specified below).

So, is this 3 things?  Or one thing:

"Simplify overly-complex first argument to memcpy()"?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 484 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20170329/9422ca32/attachment.bin