public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Menna Mahmoud <eng.mennamahmoud.mm@gmail.com>
Cc: outreachy@lists.linux.dev, johan@kernel.org, elder@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: greybus: use inline function for macros
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 10:13:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZBrGwZK5YA+hMVM4@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230321183456.10385-1-eng.mennamahmoud.mm@gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 08:34:56PM +0200, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
> Convert `to_gbphy_dev` and `to_gbphy_driver` macros into a
> static inline function.
> 
> It is not great to have macros that use the `container_of` macro,
> because from looking at the definition one cannot tell what type
> it applies to.

Note, the compiler will tell you if you get this wrong, so this really
is not an issue.

The container_of() macro is "special" in that it is very type safe and
is very commonly used just as a #define to make it simpler and the
compiler can just do the pointer math automatically without ever needing
a function call to be involved.

> One can get the same benefit from an efficiency point of view
> by making an inline function.

It's actually more efficient to be a macro, so this isn't correct.

But all of this is really moot, and I would normally just take this
patch, but it's not correct:

> 
> Suggested-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
> Signed-off-by: Menna Mahmoud <eng.mennamahmoud.mm@gmail.com>
> ---
> changes in v2:
> 	-send patch as a single patch.
> 	-edit the name of struct object.
> 	-edit commit message.
> ---
>  drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h | 10 ++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h b/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h
> index d4a225b76338..e7ba232bada1 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h
> @@ -15,7 +15,10 @@ struct gbphy_device {
>  	struct list_head list;
>  	struct device dev;
>  };
> -#define to_gbphy_dev(d) container_of(d, struct gbphy_device, dev)
> +static inline struct gbphy_device *to_gbphy_dev(const struct device *_dev)
> +{
> +	return container_of(_dev, struct gbphy_device, dev);
> +}

You need a newline right before your new function to properly set it
off.


>  
>  static inline void *gb_gbphy_get_data(struct gbphy_device *gdev)
>  {
> @@ -43,7 +46,10 @@ struct gbphy_driver {
>  
>  	struct device_driver driver;
>  };
> -#define to_gbphy_driver(d) container_of(d, struct gbphy_driver, driver)
> +static inline struct gbphy_driver *to_gbphy_driver(struct device_driver *drv)
> +{
> +	return container_of(drv, struct gbphy_driver, driver);
> +}

I'm going to be a stickler here, and say this really should be using the
new container_of_const() macro instead, and with that, you can NOT turn
it into an inline function at all due to the fun use of Generic in that
macro.

So I wouldn't recommend changing this macro at this time at all, sorry.

thanks,

greg k-h

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-03-22  9:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-21 18:34 [PATCH v2] staging: greybus: use inline function for macros Menna Mahmoud
2023-03-21 18:50 ` Alex Elder
2023-03-21 20:43   ` Julia Lawall
2023-03-21 21:09     ` Alex Elder
2023-03-21 21:29       ` Julia Lawall
2023-03-21 22:42         ` Alex Elder
2023-03-22 10:00           ` Julia Lawall
2023-03-22 12:39             ` Alex Elder
2023-03-23  4:58             ` Greg KH
2023-03-23  5:05               ` Deepak R Varma
2023-03-23  5:22                 ` Greg KH
2023-03-23 19:46                   ` Deepak R Varma
2023-03-23  9:52               ` Julia Lawall
2023-03-25  8:49                 ` Greg KH
2023-03-25  9:28                   ` Julia Lawall
2023-03-22  9:13 ` Greg KH [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-03-19 20:49 Menna Mahmoud
2023-03-19 20:56 ` Julia Lawall

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=ZBrGwZK5YA+hMVM4@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=elder@kernel.org \
    --cc=eng.mennamahmoud.mm@gmail.com \
    --cc=johan@kernel.org \
    --cc=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=outreachy@lists.linux.dev \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox