linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers/staging/lustre: Coding-guideline: Missing a blank line after declarations

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 4 Apr 2017 12:38:52 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Pushkar Jambhlekar <pushkar.iit@...il.com>
Cc:     Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
        James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "John L. Hammond" <john.hammond@...el.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Lai Siyao <lai.siyao@...el.com>,
        James Nunez <james.a.nunez@...el.com>,
        Andrew Perepechko <andrew.perepechko@...gate.com>,
        wang di <di.wang@...el.com>,
        Bob Glossman <bob.glossman@...el.com>,
        Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
        Jinshan Xiong <jinshan.xiong@...el.com>,
        Bobi Jam <bobijam@...mail.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Henri Doreau <henri.doreau@....fr>,
        Prakash Surya <surya1@...l.gov>,
        Emoly Liu <emoly.liu@...el.com>,
        Dmitry Eremin <dmitry.eremin@...el.com>,
        Johann Lombardi <johann.lombardi@...el.com>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/staging/lustre: Coding-guideline: Missing a
 blank line after declarations

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 02:45:26PM +0530, Pushkar Jambhlekar wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/cl_page.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/cl_page.c
> index cd9a40c..71fcc4c 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/cl_page.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/cl_page.c
> @@ -482,6 +482,7 @@ void cl_page_disown0(const struct lu_env *env,
>  int cl_page_is_owned(const struct cl_page *pg, const struct cl_io *io)
>  {
>  	struct cl_io *top = cl_io_top((struct cl_io *)io);
> +
>  	LINVRNT(cl_object_same(pg->cp_obj, io->ci_obj));
>  	return pg->cp_state == CPS_OWNED && pg->cp_owner == top;
>  }

This is not related to the patch but I don't understand CLOBINVRNT() and
LINVRNT().

# define LINVRNT(exp) LASSERT(exp)
# define LINVRNT(exp) ((void)sizeof !!(exp))

Why do we do the sizeof() instead of just an empty define?  The compiler
calculates the size at compile time and doesn't execute the expression
so it's the same as an empty define so far as I can tell.

regards,
dan carpenter