7:37 a.m.
This fixes all appearances of the warning but one, as that one seems to
be intentional:
WARNING: Single statement macros should not use a do {} while (0) loop
#1221: FILE: lustre/include/lustre_dlm.h:1221:
+#define LDLM_LOCK_RELEASE(lock) \
+do { \
+ /*LDLM_DEBUG((lock), "put");*/ \
+ ldlm_lock_put(lock); \
+} while (0)
I didn't know if I should touch this debug statement, and if uncommented
it would certainly be incorrect to erase the do-while construct.
Regards,
Mario.
1:27 p.m.
Is it related to this?
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1067226/c-multi-line-macro-do-while0-v...
Regards,
Kinson
On 19 Feb, 2015, at 4:37 am, Mario J. Rugiero <mrugiero(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This fixes all appearances of the warning but one, as that one seems
to be intentional:
WARNING: Single statement macros should not use a do {} while (0) loop
#1221: FILE: lustre/include/lustre_dlm.h:1221:
+#define LDLM_LOCK_RELEASE(lock) \
+do { \
+ /*LDLM_DEBUG((lock), "put");*/ \
+ ldlm_lock_put(lock); \
+} while (0)
I didn't know if I should touch this debug statement, and if uncommented it would
certainly be incorrect to erase the do-while construct.
Regards,
Mario.
<0001-Lustre-single-statement-macros-should-not-use-a-do-w.patch>_______________________________________________
HPDD-discuss mailing list
HPDD-discuss(a)lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/hpdd-discuss
1:37 p.m.
A bit, but no, it's just one of the style guidelines. checkpatch warns
against the use of do {} while (0) in single statement macros.
The actual guidelines don't mention them that I recall, though, but I
guess it's a matter of trusting the compiler to remove the unneeded
check, being a constant false, and a lot with improving readability of
the macros a bit.
In the exceptional case I pointed out, the use is valid if we uncomment
the debug statement, because it is actually several statements in the
macro, and fits the explanation in StackOverflow.
In the cases covered by the patch, the do {} while (0) is unneeded.
1:38 p.m.
BTW, sorry for the attachment. Thunderbird was showing them inline, so I
assumed it was actually inlining them. Didn't find out until I checked
my mail in the list's archives.
Regards,
Mario.
12:29 p.m.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 05:37:55PM -0300, Mario J. Rugiero wrote:
This fixes all appearances of the warning but one, as that one seems
to be
intentional:
WARNING: Single statement macros should not use a do {} while (0) loop
#1221: FILE: lustre/include/lustre_dlm.h:1221:
+#define LDLM_LOCK_RELEASE(lock) \
+do { \
+ /*LDLM_DEBUG((lock), "put");*/ \
+ ldlm_lock_put(lock); \
+} while (0)
I didn't know if I should touch this debug statement, and if uncommented it
would certainly be incorrect to erase the do-while construct.
Regards,
Mario.
>From 01a11dfacba84065a69deed929acaa84d249b7b5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
2001
From: "Mario J. Rugiero" <mrugiero(a)tecnoaccion.com.ar>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:23:39 -0300
Subject: [PATCH] Lustre: single statement macros should not use a do {} while
(0) loop.
Why is this here, and there is no changelog info here?
Please fix up and resend.
thanks,
greg k-h-
2757
days inactive
2769
days old
4 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Greg KH -
Kinson Chan 陳傑信 -
Mario J. Rugiero