From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D79B221ABD5 for ; Sat, 6 Sep 2025 06:28:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757140105; cv=none; b=Uzt1wZdSPOt6NQ2bIubpa4Yof6msjPxD51o8P6H2viD7KzaofST2FbyTor1Imn02XkPkYrHxKPd+gBO0kz+yOHVjnHyLnFyuGVwpVScANgZo8UwLaWeme7y7O1N/HCmnPRspMtqldGsMt9KDuJcvovAFFLGCFyHCGw/5E8k8LO4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757140105; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6yeju41LRBTjYcYvYrUPJAx5rR6fSfSV/7wVhV6FX+w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Do2tq4ilPzOKpwQCV/HEvMArnHAIZ5B+itejkuMqiYvf9QIss90rtdvt7v3RPv3T3wCB3D3t2Gbcrg8CRtkhsXV0wgZ4KCti8CbwcB59zJLAsYHrxTMu2GIXQ7kbapEIKPHWjZ916lO9Pxqv6W5uWJ5Zbiwb15WhrRg1QlrsOTw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=a8cK6Jce; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="a8cK6Jce" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=seGORosSvkh1VOib08ZYZZHEfmAEdmOoIa3OMqy1vbA=; b=a8cK6JceVSxmQID+OwTyYUZ05d OPWB2RDB1po1k1j4vIlxlzxiMov2Cj7xDudAQgm0R9DniTFjy73+3DbsP298pnZS20UgJLjaJwZNf 1p91kYa5+W6jw8Yu0B64eCa0K+34rjkmJfoSyvXAB1+9WSegzDhn3WSsBwH1f19Z70HjPOvAM9uMx KpGA04zc/K0FtYndWNU59+tF9CLEg5S9QYeW5SE6Asl+XPtwYmq6PCJPxXH4xjD8dC6KGf0o9+tRk fO8tbIp9OGvYBYXfPwrE1xiMAiBFEQIzLn96fW6ORRGl2CmNLxr9zSOMU9Z+M/H/e9+ACdOGMHE+L kaymDQWg==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1uumPL-0000000G7eO-2S1X; Sat, 06 Sep 2025 06:28:19 +0000 Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2025 07:28:19 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Joey Pabalinas Cc: Phillip Potter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cdrom: add parentheses around macro arguments Message-ID: <20250906062819.GU39973@ZenIV> References: <13378f5c9cafc29425b6e420cad8b513f4a9f1e1.1757095005.git.joeypabalinas@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <13378f5c9cafc29425b6e420cad8b513f4a9f1e1.1757095005.git.joeypabalinas@gmail.com> Sender: Al Viro On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 07:59:40AM -1000, Joey Pabalinas wrote: > Signed-off-by: Joey Pabalinas > --- > drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c b/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c > index 31ba1f8c1f7865dc99..462ee74621da6f32da 100644 > --- a/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c > +++ b/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.c > @@ -408,11 +408,11 @@ static int cdrom_get_disc_info(struct cdrom_device_info *cdi, > * hack to have the capability flags defined const, while we can still > * change it here without gcc complaining at every line. > */ > #define ENSURE(cdo, call, bits) \ > do { \ > - if (cdo->call == NULL) \ > + if ((cdo)->(call) == NULL) \ You do realize that the right-hand argument of . and -> is *not* an expression, right? How would anything other than identifier work, anyway? Note, BTW, that such identifier would not work as a standalone expression - its meaning depends upon the structure of union you are dealing with... General advise, from painful personal experience: before posting a patch, make sure that you have * got enough caffeine in your bloodstream * looked through the patch * tried to compile the results The order of the last two may vary, but the first one really needs to go before anything else.