linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] cxl/mem: Add basic IOCTL interface

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: <20210211100646.00007dcc@Huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:06:46 +0000
From:   Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC:     Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux ACPI" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        "Chris Browy <cbrowy@...ry-design.com>, Christoph Hellwig
        <hch@...radead.org>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, David
        Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, David Rientjes" <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        "Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>, Rafael Wysocki
        <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>, Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        "John Groves (jgroves)" <jgroves@...ron.com>,
        "Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>,
        "kernel test robot" <lkp@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.willams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] cxl/mem: Add basic IOCTL interface

On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 20:40:52 -0800
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 10:47 AM Jonathan Cameron
> <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:
> [..]
> > > +#define CXL_CMDS                                                          \
> > > +     ___C(INVALID, "Invalid Command"),                                 \
> > > +     ___C(IDENTIFY, "Identify Command"),                               \
> > > +     ___C(MAX, "Last command")
> > > +
> > > +#define ___C(a, b) CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_##a
> > > +enum { CXL_CMDS };
> > > +
> > > +#undef ___C
> > > +#define ___C(a, b) { b }
> > > +static const struct {
> > > +     const char *name;
> > > +} cxl_command_names[] = { CXL_CMDS };
> > > +#undef ___C  
> >
> > Unless there are going to be a lot of these, I'd just write them out long hand
> > as much more readable than the macro magic.  
> 
> This macro magic isn't new to Linux it was introduced with ftrace:
> 
> See "cpp tricks and treats": https://lwn.net/Articles/383362/

Yeah. I've dealt with that one a few times. It's very cleaver and compact
but a PITA to debug build errors related to it.

> 
> >
> > enum {
> >         CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_INVALID,
> >         CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_IDENTIFY,
> >         CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_MAX
> > };
> >
> > static const struct {
> >         const char *name;
> > } cxl_command_names[] = {
> >         [CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_INVALID] = { "Invalid Command" },
> >         [CXL_MEM_COMMAND_ID_IDENTIFY] = { "Identify Comamnd" },
> >         /* I hope you never need the Last command to exist in here as that sounds like a bug */
> > };
> >
> > That's assuming I actually figured the macro fun out correctly.
> > To my mind it's worth doing this stuff for 'lots' no so much for 3.  
> 
> The list will continue to expand, and it eliminates the "did you
> remember to update cxl_command_names" review burden permanently.

How about a compromise.  Add a comment giving how the first entry expands to
avoid people (me at least :) having to think their way through it every time?

Jonathan