From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wu Fengguang <wfg@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] ELD routines and proc interface
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:47:37 +0800
Message-ID: <1226648862.781771.5644@de>
References: <1226542918.126598.6912@de> <s5h4p2crsqv.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	<1226626476.943818.9357@de> <s5h3ahulqf4.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	<1226648341.561038.5360@de> <s5hzlk2kb0g.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org>
Received: from orsmga101.jf.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.21])
	by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67852243D1
	for <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>; Fri, 14 Nov 2008 08:47:46 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <s5hzlk2kb0g.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel>,
	<mailto:alsa-devel-request@alsa-project.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org
To: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Cc: alsa-devel <alsa-devel@alsa-project.org>
List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org

On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 08:43:59AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:38:56 +0800,
> Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > 
> > > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > > +++ sound-2.6/sound/pci/hda/hda_eld.c
> > > > > > +static inline unsigned char grab_bits(const unsigned char *buf,
> > > > > > +						int byte, int lowbit, int bits)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +	BUG_ON(lowbit > 7);
> > > > > > +	BUG_ON(bits > 8);
> > > > > > +	BUG_ON(bits <= 0);
> > > > > 
> > > > > Can it be rather BUILD_BUG_ON(), BTW?
> > > > > Or, hmm, doesn't work if it's an inline function?
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, converted to BUILD_BUG_ON() and it compiles OK.
> > > 
> > > The question is whether this really triggers the build error
> > > properly.  Could you check it, simply by changing the caller of
> > > grab_bits() with some invalid values?  Then you should get a compile
> > > error.
> > 
> > BUILD_BUG_ON() won't emit errors! So use BUG_ON()?
> 
> Try to make grab_bits() a macro and check whether BUILD_BUG_ON()
> works.  I think it won't be too bad to use a macro for such a pretty
> simple case.  If the resultant code looks too ugly, we should switch
> back to BUG_ON().

OK, I'm fine with a macro.

> The difference is that BUILD_BUG_ON() would add no real code while
> BUG_ON() is a pure run-time check.

But the code should be optimize away by gcc when the constant
expression is false? 

Thanks,
Fengguang