From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752011AbWLNG0Z (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 01:26:25 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752016AbWLNG0Z (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 01:26:25 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com ([171.71.176.117]:27505 "EHLO sj-iport-6.cisco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752011AbWLNG0Y (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2006 01:26:24 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 586 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Thu, 14 Dec 2006 01:26:24 EST X-IronPort-AV: i="4.12,165,1165219200"; d="scan'208"; a="90522149:sNHT43342866" To: Ben Collins Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.20-rc1] ib_verbs: Use explicit if-else statements to avoid errors with do-while macros X-Message-Flag: Warning: May contain useful information References: <1166065805.6748.135.camel@gullible> From: Roland Dreier Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:16:35 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1166065805.6748.135.camel@gullible> (Ben Collins's message of "Wed, 13 Dec 2006 22:10:05 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.19 (linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Dec 2006 06:16:36.0255 (UTC) FILETIME=[68AB62F0:01C71F47] Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-1; header.From=rdreier@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim1002 verified; ); Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I see Linus already took this, which is fine... blame me for merging this without fixing my cross-compile testbed. Anyway: > static inline int ib_dma_mapping_error(struct ib_device *dev, u64 dma_addr) > { > - return dev->dma_ops ? > - dev->dma_ops->mapping_error(dev, dma_addr) : > - dma_mapping_error(dma_addr); > + if (dev->dma_ops) > + return dev->dma_ops->mapping_error(dev, dma_addr); > + return dma_mapping_error(dma_addr); This stuff wasn't needed, was it? It's only the wrappers around void functions that can't use ?: I would think... surely any trivial macro replacement for a dma API function that returns a value must evaluate to something like (0) that is safe to use in this context. - R.