linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: rtl8712 : osdep_intf.h: fix macro coding style issue

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAH6sp9Nts878tLP+RNp1Xsqn=WB-yAQDai4p2bUeRANa=XZs4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Jun 2017 11:59:26 +0200
From:   Frans Klaver <fransklaver@...il.com>
To:     Jaya Durga <rjdurga@...il.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Larry.Finger@...inger.net,
        Florian Schilhabel <florian.c.schilhabel@...glemail.com>,
        robsonde@...il.com, becher.jannik@...il.com,
        driverdevel <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jaya Durga <jayad@...c.in>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] Staging: rtl8712 : osdep_intf.h: fix macro coding
 style issue

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 9:48 AM, Jaya Durga <rjdurga@...il.com> wrote:
> Fix checkpatch.pl warning of the form "CHECK" Macro argument 'x'
> may be better as '(x)' to avoid precedence issues.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaya Durga <jayad@...c.in>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h
> index 1985423..dac6aed 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8712/osdep_intf.h
> @@ -29,7 +29,10 @@
>  #include "osdep_service.h"
>  #include "drv_types.h"
>
> -#define RND4(x)        ((((x) >> 2) + ((((x) & 3) == 0) ?  0 : 1)) << 2)
> +static inline unsigned int RND4(unsigned int x)
> +{
> +       return (((x >> 2) + (((x & 3) == 0) ?  0 : 1)) << 2);
> +}

Looks like the checkpatch warning has already been addressed, or
checkpatch throws a false positive there.

I like this inline function better than the macro, since

RND(get_some_value());

may return funky results.

Frans