From: Jake Oshins <jakeo@microsoft.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"devel@linuxdriverproject.org" <devel@linuxdriverproject.org>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH RESEND 1/3] PCI: Add fwnode_handle to pci_sysdata
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 22:42:00 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DM2PR0301MB123298B3233B172BA2C92EF4ABD00@DM2PR0301MB1232.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56B24D93.4040202@arm.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Zyngier [mailto:marc.zyngier@arm.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:57 AM
> To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>; Jake Oshins
> <jakeo@microsoft.com>
> Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; devel@linuxdriverproject.org; Haiyang Zhang
> <haiyangz@microsoft.com>; bhelgaas@google.com; linux-
> pci@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/3] PCI: Add fwnode_handle to pci_sysdata
>
> On 03/02/16 18:51, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 06:32:20PM +0000, Jake Oshins wrote:
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:helgaas@kernel.org]
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2016 10:25 AM
> >>> To: Jake Oshins <jakeo@microsoft.com>
[snip]
> >>>>
> >>>> +#ifndef pci_root_bus_fwnode
> >>>> +#define pci_root_bus_fwnode(bus) ((void)(bus), NULL)
> >>>
> >>> Huh, interesting. This is new for me; I guess the idea is that we at least
> >>> evaluate "bus" even when pci_root_bus_fwnode isn't defined, so the
> >>> compiler can catch egregious errors?
> >>>
> >>
> >> This was a suggestion by Mark Zyngier. It made the non-x86 architectures
> build benignly. If you'd like it done differently, I'm open to suggestion.
>
> I don't remember suggesting the use of the comma operator, but just to
> check that pci_root_bus_fwnode wasn't previously defined.
>
> > Something like "#define pci_root_bus_fwnode(bus) NULL" would be
> > typical. What I'm curious about is the use of the comma operator.
> > I'm not opposed to it; I'm just trying to understand why it makes a
> > difference.
>
> I guess it flags the variable as used, and prevents an overly sensitive
> compiler from being loud and obnoxious... Just a guess though.
>
> M.
> --
I was just copying the form that was in the code that Marc pointed out, somewhere else. I have no particular attachment to this construct. Honestly, since I'm still relatively new to the Linux codebase, I just assumed that was a common form that I should follow suit on. If you tell me that the simpler NULL is more typical, I prefer that. I'll simplify this when I resend the patch series.
Thanks,
Jake
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-03 23:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 17:41 [PATCH RESEND 0/3] PCI: hv: New paravirtual PCI front-end driver jakeo
2016-02-02 17:41 ` [PATCH RESEND 1/3] PCI: Add fwnode_handle to pci_sysdata jakeo
2016-02-03 18:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-02-03 18:32 ` Jake Oshins
2016-02-03 18:51 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-02-03 18:57 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-02-03 22:42 ` Jake Oshins [this message]
2016-02-02 17:41 ` [PATCH RESEND 2/3] PCI: irqdomain: Look up IRQ domain by fwnode_handle jakeo
2016-02-02 17:41 ` [PATCH RESEND 3/3] PCI: hv: New paravirtual PCI front-end for Hyper-V VMs jakeo
2016-02-03 21:29 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-02-03 22:22 ` Jake Oshins
2016-02-07 10:03 ` kbuild test robot
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=DM2PR0301MB123298B3233B172BA2C92EF4ABD00@DM2PR0301MB1232.namprd03.prod.outlook.com \
--to=jakeo@microsoft.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=devel@linuxdriverproject.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=haiyangz@microsoft.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=kys@microsoft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
/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®