linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/36] usb: serial: ti_usb_3410_5052: Use inline functions rather than macro

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: <20160715105034.GC8809@localhost>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:50:34 +0200
From:	Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Cc:	Mathieu OTHACEHE <m.othacehe@...il.com>, johan@...nel.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/36] usb: serial: ti_usb_3410_5052: Use inline
 functions rather than macro

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 03:00:39PM +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
> 
> On 5/12/2016 11:48 AM, Mathieu OTHACEHE wrote:
> 
> > Inline functions are preferable to macros resembling functions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mathieu OTHACEHE <m.othacehe@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c | 16 ++++++++++++----
> >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c b/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c
> > index 6002e8b..2fc3ea1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/serial/ti_usb_3410_5052.c
> > @@ -248,8 +248,16 @@ struct ti_interrupt {
> >  } __packed;
> >
> >  /* Interrupt codes */
> > -#define TI_GET_PORT_FROM_CODE(c)	(((c) >> 4) - 3)
> > -#define TI_GET_FUNC_FROM_CODE(c)	((c) & 0x0f)
> > +static inline int ti_get_port_from_code(unsigned char code)
> > +{
> > +	return (code >> 4) - 3;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int ti_get_func_from_code(unsigned char code)
> > +{
> > +	return code & 0x0f;
> > +}
> > +
> 
>     We don't specify *inline* in the .c files (only in .h), letting gcc figure 
> it out.

Indeed. I dropped the inline keywords and also moved the functions above
the interrupt-in completion handler, which is the only place they are
used.

Thanks,
Johan