linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] erofs: some marcos are much more readable as a function

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: <20190830032006.GA20217@architecture4>
Date:   Fri, 30 Aug 2019 11:20:06 +0800
From:   Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:     Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org>, Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>,
        Miao Xie <miaoxie@...wei.com>, <weidu.du@...wei.com>,
        "Fang Wei" <fangwei1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] erofs: some marcos are much more readable as a
 function

Hi Joe,

On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 08:16:27PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-08-30 at 11:00 +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > As Christoph suggested [1], these marcos are much
> > more readable as a function
> 
> s/marcos/macros/
> .
> []
> > diff --git a/fs/erofs/erofs_fs.h b/fs/erofs/erofs_fs.h
> []
> > @@ -168,16 +168,24 @@ struct erofs_xattr_entry {
> >  	char   e_name[0];       /* attribute name */
> >  } __packed;
> >  
> > -#define ondisk_xattr_ibody_size(count)	({\
> > -	u32 __count = le16_to_cpu(count); \
> > -	((__count) == 0) ? 0 : \
> > -	sizeof(struct erofs_xattr_ibody_header) + \
> > -		sizeof(__u32) * ((__count) - 1); })
> > +static inline unsigned int erofs_xattr_ibody_size(__le16 d_icount)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned int icount = le16_to_cpu(d_icount);
> > +
> > +	if (!icount)
> > +		return 0;
> > +
> > +	return sizeof(struct erofs_xattr_ibody_header) +
> > +		sizeof(__u32) * (icount - 1);
> 
> Maybe use struct_size()?
> 
> {
> 	struct erofs_xattr_ibody_header *ibh;
> 	unsigned int icount = le16_to_cpu(d_icount);
> 
> 	if (!icount)
> 		return 0;
> 
> 	return struct_size(ibh, h_shared_xattrs, icount - 1);
> }

Okay, That is fine, will resend this patch.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

>