[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150805153507.GM19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:35:07 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
adrian.hunter@...el.com,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 1/4] perf: Introduce extended syscall error
reporting
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 02:45:56PM +0300, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> +#define __perf_err(__e, __c, __m) ({ \
> + static struct perf_err_site \
> + __attribute__ ((unused,__section__("__perf_err"))) \
> + __err_site = { \
> + .message = (__m), \
> + .owner = PERF_MODNAME, \
> + .code = __builtin_constant_p((__c)) ? \
> + (__c) : 0, \
> + }; \
> + (__e) = &__err_site; \
> +})
Why is __e an argument at all? Why not simply return &__err_site ?
--
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