mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Elder <elder@ieee.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
	Jackson Chui <jacksonchui.qwerty@gmail.com>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: Clear up precedence for gcam logging macros
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2024 11:45:51 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5e1c5156-d906-4473-970b-bff71e4dcd96@ieee.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5eb3afe2-da7b-4f98-aac2-bff529a02cea@moroto.mountain>

On 4/6/24 4:09 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 05, 2024 at 02:22:05PM -0700, Jackson Chui wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 05:05:09PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
>>> On 4/3/24 7:16 PM, Jackson Chui wrote:
>>>> Reported by checkpatch:
>>>>
>>>> CHECK: Macro argument 'gcam' may be better as '(gcam)' to avoid
>>>> precedence issues
>>>
>>> I agree with your argument about the way the macro should be
>>> defined.  But perhaps these gcam_*() functions could just
>>> be eliminated?
>>>
>>> I see 15 calls to gcam_err(), 1 call to gcam_dbg(), and none
>>> to gcam_info().  It would be a different patch, but maybe
>>> you could do that instead?
>>>
>>> 					-Alex
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Disambiguates '&' (address-of) operator and '->' operator precedence,
>>>> accounting for how '(gcam)->bundle->dev' is a 'struct device' and not a
>>>> 'struct device*', which is required by the dev_{dbg,info,err} driver
>>>> model diagnostic macros. Issue found by checkpatch.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jackson Chui <jacksonchui.qwerty@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c | 6 +++---
>>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c
>>>> index a8173aa3a995..d82a2d2abdca 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/camera.c
>>>> @@ -180,9 +180,9 @@ static const struct gb_camera_fmt_info *gb_camera_get_format_info(u16 gb_fmt)
>>>>    #define GB_CAMERA_MAX_SETTINGS_SIZE	8192
>>>> -#define gcam_dbg(gcam, format...)	dev_dbg(&gcam->bundle->dev, format)
>>>> -#define gcam_info(gcam, format...)	dev_info(&gcam->bundle->dev, format)
>>>> -#define gcam_err(gcam, format...)	dev_err(&gcam->bundle->dev, format)
>>>> +#define gcam_dbg(gcam, format...)	dev_dbg(&((gcam)->bundle->dev), format)
>>>> +#define gcam_info(gcam, format...)	dev_info(&((gcam)->bundle->dev), format)
>>>> +#define gcam_err(gcam, format...)	dev_err(&((gcam)->bundle->dev), format)
>>>>    static int gb_camera_operation_sync_flags(struct gb_connection *connection,
>>>>    					  int type, unsigned int flags,
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback, Alex!
>>
>> I thought about refactoring it, but I feel it is worth keeping
>> the macro around. It acts as an apdater between callers, who
>> have 'gcam' and want to log and what the dynamic debug macros
>> expect. Without it, the code gets pretty ugly.
> 
> Another idea would be to create a function:
> 
> struct device *gcam_dev(struct gb_camera *gcam)
> {
> 	return &gcam->bundle->dev;
> }
> 
> 	dev_dbg(gcam_dev(gcam), "received metadata ...
> 
> (I don't know how to actually compile this code so I haven't tried it).

Yes, I prefer this over the original suggestion.  But
even here the gcam_dev() function doesn't add all that
much value; it saves four characters I guess.

Jackson, the basic principle that makes me say I don't
like the wrapper macros is that the wrapper obscures
the simple call(s) to dev_dbg(), etc.  If there was
something you wanted to do every time--along with
calling dev_dbg()--then maybe the wrapper would be
helpful, but instead it simply hides the standard call.
Better to have the code just use the functions kernel
programmers recognize.

					-Alex
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter


  reply	other threads:[~2024-04-06 16:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-04  0:16 Jackson Chui
2024-04-04 22:05 ` Alex Elder
2024-04-05 21:22   ` Jackson Chui
2024-04-06  9:09     ` Dan Carpenter
2024-04-06 16:45       ` Alex Elder [this message]
2024-04-06 22:35         ` Jackson Chui
2024-04-08  6:35           ` Dan Carpenter
2024-04-07  6:13 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman

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=5e1c5156-d906-4473-970b-bff71e4dcd96@ieee.org \
    --to=elder@ieee.org \
    --cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
    --cc=elder@kernel.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=jacksonchui.qwerty@gmail.com \
    --cc=johan@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-staging@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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®