From: "Marek Behún" <kabel@kernel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
Hayes Wang <hayeswang@realtek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] r8152: add MCU typed read/write functions
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:30:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201105123043.3b114bec@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201105105642.pgdxxlytpindj5fq@skbuf>
On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:56:42 +0200
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 10:54:18AM +0100, Marek Behún wrote:
> > I thought that static inline functions are preferred to macros, since
> > compiler warns better if they are used incorrectly...
>
> Citation needed.
Just search for substring "instead of macro" in git log, there are
multiple such changes that were accepted since it provides better
typechecking. I am not saying it is documented anywhere, just that I
thought it was preffered.
> Also, how do static inline functions wrapped in macros
> (i.e. your patch) stack up against your claim about better warnings?
If they are defined as functions (they don't have to be inline,
of course) instead of macros and they are used incorrectly, the compiler
provides more readable warnings. (Yes, in current versions of gcc it is
much better than in the past, but still there are more lines of
warnings printed: "in expansion of macro"...).
> I guess ease of maintainership should prevail here, and Hayes should
> have the final word. I don't really have any stake here.
Vladimir, your arguments are valid and I accept the reasoning.
I too can see that the resulting code is a little awkward.
Marek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-05 11:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-03 19:22 [PATCH net-next 0/5] r8152 changes Marek Behún
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 1/5] r8152: use generic USB macros to define product table Marek Behún
2020-11-04 1:57 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-04 6:02 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 7:14 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-04 8:53 ` Greg KH
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 2/5] r8152: cosmetic improvement of product table macro Marek Behún
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 3/5] r8152: add MCU typed read/write functions Marek Behún
2020-11-03 21:47 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 5:55 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 8:47 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 10:25 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 10:35 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 11:00 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 11:10 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-04 12:14 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-04 21:07 ` Jakub Kicinski
2020-11-05 9:54 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-05 10:56 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-05 11:30 ` Marek Behún [this message]
2020-11-05 12:06 ` Vladimir Oltean
2020-11-06 3:01 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-06 6:39 ` Marek Behún
2020-11-06 7:39 ` Hayes Wang
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 4/5] r8152: rename r8153_phy_status to r8153_phy_status_wait Marek Behún
2020-11-03 19:22 ` [PATCH net-next 5/5] r8152: use *_modify helpers instead of read/write combos Marek Behún
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=20201105123043.3b114bec@kernel.org \
--to=kabel@kernel.org \
--cc=hayeswang@realtek.com \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.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.