mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cpufreq@vger.kernel.org,
	Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@suse.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	x86@vger.kernel.org, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kernel.h: Add DO_ONCE statement expression macro
Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 16:15:07 +0930	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200905251615.08414.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7b063fda0675875d51a5da49f59e89520d025eee.1242943463.git.joe@perches.com>

On Fri, 22 May 2009 08:30:22 am Joe Perches wrote:
> Add a DO_ONCE statement expression analogous to printk_once
> that executes any arbitrary statement exactly once.
>
> This will take the place of printk_once so that
> DO_ONCE(pr_<foo>) or any other statement performed
> a single time may be easily written.

If you're going to use a statement expression, was the intent to make
it usable for a test?  If so, you want something vaguely like:

#define DO_ONCE(x...) ({			\
	static bool __done = false;		\
	bool did = !__done;			\
	if (!__done) {				\
		x;				\
		__done = true;			\
	}					\
	did;					\
})

Otherwise, why not just use a normal do {} while (0) ?

Anyway, statements in macros leave me uncomfortable. I prefer explicit
ONCE() macro which can be tested.

Cheers,
Rusty.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-05-25 10:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-21 23:00 [PATCH 0/3] Introduce and use " Joe Perches
2009-05-21 23:00 ` [PATCH 1/3] kernel.h: Add " Joe Perches
2009-05-21 23:27   ` Randy Dunlap
2009-05-21 23:32     ` Joe Perches
2009-05-21 23:36       ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-05-21 23:41       ` Alan Cox
2009-05-22  0:27   ` Al Viro
2009-05-22  1:09     ` Joe Perches
2009-05-25  6:45   ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2009-05-26  2:42   ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-21 23:00 ` [PATCH 2/3] arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c: Use DO_ONCE & spelling fix Joe Perches
2009-05-21 23:26   ` Dave Jones
2009-05-21 23:34     ` Joe Perches
2009-05-21 23:47       ` Dave Jones
2009-05-21 23:52         ` Joe Perches
2009-05-21 23:00 ` [PATCH 3/3] kernel.h: Remove unused printk_once Joe Perches

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=200905251615.08414.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=cpufreq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=travis@sgi.com \
    --cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@vger.kernel.org \
    /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

Powered by JetHome