Re: [PATCH 1/1] platform/x86: think-lmi: Convert container_of() macros to static inline

["Mark Pearson" <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>]

Thanks Ilpo,

On Fri, Apr 12, 2024, at 9:09 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> The macros to_tlmi_pwd_setting() and to_tlmi_attr_setting() are fragile
> because they expect the variable name to be 'kobj', otherwise the build
> will fail because container_of()'s 3rd parameter (member) is taken from
> the parameter given to the macro.
>
> While at it, move them into a more logical place.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c | 13 ++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c 
> b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
> index 9345316b45db..0f2264bb7577 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
> @@ -175,9 +175,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(debug_support, "Enable debug 
> command support");
>  #define TLMI_SMP_PWD BIT(6) /* System Management */
>  #define TLMI_CERT    BIT(7) /* Certificate Based */
> 
> -#define to_tlmi_pwd_setting(kobj)  container_of(kobj, struct 
> tlmi_pwd_setting, kobj)
> -#define to_tlmi_attr_setting(kobj)  container_of(kobj, struct 
> tlmi_attr_setting, kobj)
> -
>  static const struct tlmi_err_codes tlmi_errs[] = {
>  	{"Success", 0},
>  	{"Not Supported", -EOPNOTSUPP},
> @@ -198,6 +195,16 @@ static struct think_lmi tlmi_priv;
>  static const struct class *fw_attr_class;
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(tlmi_mutex);
> 
> +static inline struct tlmi_pwd_setting *to_tlmi_pwd_setting(struct 
> kobject *kobj)
> +{
> +	return container_of(kobj, struct tlmi_pwd_setting, kobj);
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct tlmi_attr_setting *to_tlmi_attr_setting(struct 
> kobject *kobj)
> +{
> +	return container_of(kobj, struct tlmi_attr_setting, kobj);
> +}
> +
>  /* Convert BIOS WMI error string to suitable error code */
>  static int tlmi_errstr_to_err(const char *errstr)
>  {
> -- 
> 2.39.2

Looks good to me. Let me know if you want this tested on Lenovo HW and I'll do a build with this in - but it looks very uncontroversial :)

Reviewed-by Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebbb.ca>