From ba6614624bae88e27a7b24ddde2ba46bb5aea899 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jean Delvare Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 12:19:29 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] There's no rationale for preventing against setting the same subfeature value several times. If the user asks for that, let's just do it. Otherwise we have a performance penalty for all other users. git-svn-id: http://lm-sensors.org/svn/lm-sensors/branches/lm-sensors-3.0.0@4840 7894878c-1315-0410-8ee3-d5d059ff63e0 --- lib/access.c | 21 +++------------------ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) diff --git a/lib/access.c b/lib/access.c index 1c2b0221..b4605663 100644 --- a/lib/access.c +++ b/lib/access.c @@ -458,13 +458,9 @@ static int sensors_do_this_chip_sets(const sensors_chip_name *name) { sensors_chip *chip; double value; - int i, j; + int i; int err = 0, res; const sensors_subfeature *subfeature; - int *feature_list = NULL; - int feature_count = 0; - int feature_max = 0; - int subfeat_nr; for (chip = NULL; (chip = sensors_for_all_config_chips(name, chip));) for (i = 0; i < chip->sets_count; i++) { @@ -476,17 +472,6 @@ static int sensors_do_this_chip_sets(const sensors_chip_name *name) err = SENSORS_ERR_NO_ENTRY; continue; } - subfeat_nr = subfeature->number; - - /* Check whether we already set this feature */ - for (j = 0; j < feature_count; j++) - if (feature_list[j] == subfeat_nr) - break; - if (j != feature_count) - continue; - sensors_add_array_el(&subfeat_nr, &feature_list, - &feature_count, &feature_max, - sizeof(int)); res = sensors_eval_expr(name, chip->sets[i].value, 0, &value); @@ -496,14 +481,14 @@ static int sensors_do_this_chip_sets(const sensors_chip_name *name) err = res; continue; } - if ((res = sensors_set_value(name, subfeat_nr, value))) { + if ((res = sensors_set_value(name, subfeature->number, + value))) { sensors_parse_error("Failed to set value", chip->sets[i].lineno); err = res; continue; } } - free(feature_list); return err; }