| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 10:24:41 +0100
From: Craig Inches <Craig@...iginches.com>
To: oleg.drokin@...el.com, andreas.dilger@...el.com,
jsimmons@...radead.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
john.hammond@...el.com
Cc: lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Craig Inches <Craig@...iginches.com>
Subject: [PATCH RESEND v2] Staging: lustre cleanup macros in libcfs_private.h
This resolves a checkpatch warning that "Single statement macros should
not use a do {} while (0) loop" by removing the loop and adjusting line
length accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Craig Inches <Craig@...iginches.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Kept statements together
- Kept operator on previous line
.../lustre/include/linux/libcfs/libcfs_private.h | 51 +++++++---------------
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/include/linux/libcfs/libcfs_private.h b/drivers/staging/lustre/include/linux/libcfs/libcfs_private.h
index 2dae857..e774c75 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/include/linux/libcfs/libcfs_private.h
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/include/linux/libcfs/libcfs_private.h
@@ -87,12 +87,9 @@ do { \
#define LIBCFS_VMALLOC_SIZE (2 << PAGE_SHIFT) /* 2 pages */
#endif
-#define LIBCFS_ALLOC_PRE(size, mask) \
-do { \
- LASSERT(!in_interrupt() || \
- ((size) <= LIBCFS_VMALLOC_SIZE && \
- !gfpflags_allow_blocking(mask))); \
-} while (0)
+#define LIBCFS_ALLOC_PRE(size, mask) \
+ LASSERT(!in_interrupt() || ((size) <= LIBCFS_VMALLOC_SIZE && \
+ !gfpflags_allow_blocking(mask)))
#define LIBCFS_ALLOC_POST(ptr, size) \
do { \
@@ -187,46 +184,28 @@ void cfs_array_free(void *vars);
#if LASSERT_ATOMIC_ENABLED
/** assert value of @a is equal to @v */
-#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_EQ(a, v) \
-do { \
- LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) == v, \
- "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a))); \
-} while (0)
+#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_EQ(a, v) \
+ LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) == v, "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a)))
/** assert value of @a is unequal to @v */
-#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_NE(a, v) \
-do { \
- LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) != v, \
- "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a))); \
-} while (0)
+#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_NE(a, v) \
+ LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) != v, "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a)))
/** assert value of @a is little than @v */
-#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_LT(a, v) \
-do { \
- LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) < v, \
- "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a))); \
-} while (0)
+#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_LT(a, v) \
+ LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) < v, "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a)))
/** assert value of @a is little/equal to @v */
-#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_LE(a, v) \
-do { \
- LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) <= v, \
- "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a))); \
-} while (0)
+#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_LE(a, v) \
+ LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) <= v, "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a)))
/** assert value of @a is great than @v */
-#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_GT(a, v) \
-do { \
- LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) > v, \
- "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a))); \
-} while (0)
+#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_GT(a, v) \
+ LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) > v, "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a)))
/** assert value of @a is great/equal to @v */
-#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_GE(a, v) \
-do { \
- LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) >= v, \
- "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a))); \
-} while (0)
+#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_GE(a, v) \
+ LASSERTF(atomic_read(a) >= v, "value: %d\n", atomic_read((a)))
/** assert value of @a is great than @v1 and little than @v2 */
#define LASSERT_ATOMIC_GT_LT(a, v1, v2) \
--
2.10.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists