linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] intel-iommu: fix build with CONFIG_BRANCH

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904070751510.4010@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Tue, 7 Apr 2009 07:54:39 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] intel-iommu: fix build with CONFIG_BRANCH_TRACER=y



On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, David Woodhouse wrote:
> 
> But it's a workaround, not a fix -- if we're going to #define if() then
> we should damn well make it transparent, and not have to work around
> breakage in arbitrary places.
> 
> Hence the patch I sent to Linus last night, which fixes it in the
> _right_ place:
> 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123907505308502&w=2

Oh, Gods. 

It's definitely better in the sense that if we define 'if()', we should 
give it proper C semantics, but it's in some ways even uglier.

Can we please do it something like the following instead:

	#define if(a, ...) \
		__trace_if( (a, ## __VA_ARGS__) )

so that you don't need to do that ", ## __VA_ARGS__" thing three times?

		Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/