linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: gdm724x: gdm_tty: replaced macro with 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: <20200901175024.GA1509755@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Sep 2020 19:50:24 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Antoni Przybylik <antoni.przybylik@...pl>
Cc:     devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: gdm724x: gdm_tty: replaced macro with a function

On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 06:18:46PM +0200, Antoni Przybylik wrote:
> This approach is more elegant and prevents some problems related to
> macros such as operator precedence in expanded expression.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Antoni Przybylik <antoni.przybylik@...pl>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_tty.c | 15 +++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_tty.c b/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_tty.c
> index 6e813693a766..a7db0672e81d 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_tty.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/gdm724x/gdm_tty.c
> @@ -27,8 +27,6 @@
>  
>  #define MUX_TX_MAX_SIZE 2048
>  
> -#define GDM_TTY_READY(gdm) (gdm && gdm->tty_dev && gdm->port.count)
> -
>  static struct tty_driver *gdm_driver[TTY_MAX_COUNT];
>  static struct gdm *gdm_table[TTY_MAX_COUNT][GDM_TTY_MINOR];
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(gdm_table_lock);
> @@ -36,6 +34,11 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(gdm_table_lock);
>  static const char *DRIVER_STRING[TTY_MAX_COUNT] = {"GCTATC", "GCTDM"};
>  static char *DEVICE_STRING[TTY_MAX_COUNT] = {"GCT-ATC", "GCT-DM"};
>  
> +static int gdm_tty_ready(gdm *gdm)
> +{
> +	return (gdm && gdm->tty_dev && gdm->port.count);
> +}

You obviously did not even build this patch, which is a bit rude, don't
you think?

:(