[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120206191854.GA16702@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 11:18:54 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...il.com>,
San Mehat <san@...gle.com>, Colin Cross <ccross@...roid.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] oom: Make find_lock_task_mm() sparse-aware
On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 10:59:09PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2012 at 08:35:42AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> [...]
> > > -extern struct task_struct *find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p);
> > > +extern struct task_struct *__find_lock_task_mm(struct task_struct *p);
> > > +
> > > +#define find_lock_task_mm(p) \
> > > +({ \
> > > + struct task_struct *__ret; \
> > > + \
> > > + __cond_lock(&(p)->alloc_lock, __ret = __find_lock_task_mm(p)); \
> > > + __ret; \
> > > +})
> >
> > Please use the proper "do...while" style thing here for multi-line,
> > complex #defines like the rest of the kernel does so that you don't end
> > up debugging horrible problems later.
>
> Unfortunately this isn't possible in this case. Unlike '({})' GCC
> extension, do-while statement does not evaluate to a value, i.e.
> 'x = do { 123; } while (0);' is illegal.
Ah, you are right, my bad, sorry about that.
greg k-h
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists