From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030212AbWGFGsJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jul 2006 02:48:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030214AbWGFGsJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jul 2006 02:48:09 -0400 Received: from orion2.pixelized.ch ([195.190.190.13]:41666 "EHLO mail.pixelized.ch") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030212AbWGFGsI (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Jul 2006 02:48:08 -0400 Message-ID: <44ACB21B.9050206@debian.org> Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2006 08:47:55 +0200 From: "Giacomo A. Catenazzi" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060619) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: "Randy.Dunlap" , Arjan van de Ven , akpm@osdl.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@elte.hu, rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: ARM dyntick cleanup References: <1151885928.24611.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060702173527.cbdbf0e1.akpm@osdl.org> <1151947627.3108.39.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20060705162425.547f3d3f.rdunlap@xenotime.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Randy.Dunlap wrote: >> OK, I'll bite. What part of Linus's macro doesn't work. > > Heh. This is "C language 101". > > The reason we always write > > #define empty_statement do { } while (0) > > instead of > > #define empty_statement /* empty */ > > is not that > > if (x) > empty_statement; > > wouldn't work like Arjan claimed, but because otherwise the empty > statement won't parse perfectly as a real C statement. But the classical way of empty statments is "((void) 0)" See K&R, glibc or SuS, for assert.h ( http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/basedefs/assert.h.html ) or I miss something? ciao cate