[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87muuqsu6g.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 08:16:23 +1000
From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>, Stefan Agner <stefan@...er.ch>,
Andrei Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
Yisheng Xie <ysxie@...mail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel.h: Add for_each_if()
On Mon, Jul 16 2018, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, 2018-07-13 at 16:42 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On 07/13/2018 04:37 PM, NeilBrown wrote:
>
>>
>> coding-style.rst says:
>> Also, use braces when a loop contains more than a single simple
>> statement:
>
> Independently on a) would we use some macro for condition, or b) fix
> macros against this kind of nested conditions, there is another
> weirdness we would like to avoid, i.e.
>
> for_each_foo() {
> ...
> } else {
> ...
> }
>
> It is written according to coding style, but too much weird.
Agreed. Too weird.
>
> So, summarize this discussion I think we would
> - keep for_each_if() in DRM subsystem alone
> - fix macros which are using positive condition 'if (cond)' by replacing
> with 'if (!cond) {} else' form for sake of robustness.
>
> Do you agree on that?
I agree.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (833 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists