Re: [PATCH v2] Xen/atomic: use static inlines instead of macros

[Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1227 bytes --]



Tim Deegan wrote:
>
> At 10:55 +0000 on 28 Mar (1396000508), Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>
>> This is some coverity-inspired tidying.
>>
>> Coverity has some grief analysing the call sites of atomic_read(). 
>> This is
>> believed to be a bug in Coverity itself when expanding the nested 
>> macros, but
>> there is no legitimate reason for it to be a macro in the first place.
>>
>> This patch changes {,_}atomic_{read,set}() from being macros to being 
>> static
>> inline functions, thus gaining some type safety.
>>
>> One issue which is not immediately obvious is that the non-atomic 
>> variants take
>> their atomic_t at a different level of indirection to the atomic 
>> variants.
>>
>> This is not suitable for _atomic_set() (when used to initialise an 
>> atomic_t)
>> which is converted to take its parameter as a pointer. One callsite of
>> _atomic_set() is updated, while the other two callsites are updated to
>> ATOMIC_INIT().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper<andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
>
>
> Reviewed-by: Tim Deegan<tim@xen.org>
>
> FWIW, I approve of converting both kinds of accessors to inlines, just
> on general principles.


Agreed, functions are preferable to macros.

Acked-by: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1491 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel