From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
Cc: outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rts5208: rewrite macro with GNU extension __auto_type
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 17:51:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191104165148.GA2293059@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191104164400.9935-1-jbi.octave@gmail.com>
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 04:44:00PM +0000, Jules Irenge wrote:
> Rewrite macro function with GNU extension __auto_type
> to remove issue detected by checkpatch tool.
> CHECK: MACRO argument reuse - possible side-effects?
>
> Signed-off-by: Jules Irenge <jbi.octave@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h | 92 +++++++++++++++++------------
> 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h b/drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h
> index bac65784d4a1..4b986d5c68da 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h
> @@ -386,23 +386,31 @@ struct zone_entry {
>
> /* SD card */
> #define CHK_SD(sd_card) (((sd_card)->sd_type & 0xFF) == TYPE_SD)
> -#define CHK_SD_HS(sd_card) (CHK_SD(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & SD_HS))
> -#define CHK_SD_SDR50(sd_card) (CHK_SD(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & SD_SDR50))
> -#define CHK_SD_DDR50(sd_card) (CHK_SD(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & SD_DDR50))
> -#define CHK_SD_SDR104(sd_card) (CHK_SD(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & SD_SDR104))
> -#define CHK_SD_HCXC(sd_card) (CHK_SD(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & SD_HCXC))
> -#define CHK_SD_HC(sd_card) (CHK_SD_HCXC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->capacity <= 0x4000000))
> -#define CHK_SD_XC(sd_card) (CHK_SD_HCXC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->capacity > 0x4000000))
> -#define CHK_SD30_SPEED(sd_card) (CHK_SD_SDR50(sd_card) || \
> - CHK_SD_DDR50(sd_card) || \
> - CHK_SD_SDR104(sd_card))
> +#define CHK_SD_HS(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->sd_type & SD_HS); })
> +#define CHK_SD_SDR50(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->sd_type & SD_SDR50); })
> +#define CHK_SD_DDR50(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->sd_type & SD_DDR50); })
> +#define CHK_SD_SDR104(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->sd_type & SD_SDR104); })
> +#define CHK_SD_HCXC(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->sd_type & SD_HCXC); })
> +#define CHK_SD_HC(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD_HCXC(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->capacity <= 0x4000000); })
> +#define CHK_SD_XC(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD_HCXC(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->capacity > 0x4000000); })
> +#define CHK_SD30_SPEED(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD_SDR50(_sd) || \
> + CHK_SD_DDR50(_sd) || \
> + CHK_SD_SDR104(_sd); })
>
> #define SET_SD(sd_card) ((sd_card)->sd_type = TYPE_SD)
> #define SET_SD_HS(sd_card) ((sd_card)->sd_type |= SD_HS)
> @@ -420,18 +428,24 @@ struct zone_entry {
> /* MMC card */
> #define CHK_MMC(sd_card) (((sd_card)->sd_type & 0xFF) == \
> TYPE_MMC)
> -#define CHK_MMC_26M(sd_card) (CHK_MMC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & MMC_26M))
> -#define CHK_MMC_52M(sd_card) (CHK_MMC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & MMC_52M))
> -#define CHK_MMC_4BIT(sd_card) (CHK_MMC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & MMC_4BIT))
> -#define CHK_MMC_8BIT(sd_card) (CHK_MMC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & MMC_8BIT))
> -#define CHK_MMC_SECTOR_MODE(sd_card) (CHK_MMC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & MMC_SECTOR_MODE))
> -#define CHK_MMC_DDR52(sd_card) (CHK_MMC(sd_card) && \
> - ((sd_card)->sd_type & MMC_DDR52))
> +#define CHK_MMC_26M(sd_card)\
> + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_MMC(_sd) && \
> + (_sd->sd_type & MMC_26M); })
Ick, no. These are obviously pointers, which can not be "evaluated
twice" so this whole thing is just fine.
checkpatch is just a "hint" that you might want to look at the code.
This stuff is just fine, look at how it is being used for proof of that.
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-04 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-04 16:44 [PATCH] staging: rts5208: rewrite macro with GNU extension __auto_type Jules Irenge
2019-11-04 16:51 ` Greg KH [this message]
2019-11-04 17:07 ` Joe Perches
2019-11-05 11:09 ` Jules Irenge
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191104165148.GA2293059@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=jbi.octave@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.