linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 06/10] staging: r8188eu: Add space between function & macro parameters

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: <Y1EkZ7+1yiH8PI0a@debian-BULLSEYE-live-builder-AMD64>
Date:   Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:05:19 +0530
From:   Deepak R Varma <drv@...lo.com>
To:     Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...ia.fr>
Cc:     outreachy@...ts.linux.dev, Larry.Finger@...inger.net,
        phil@...lpotter.co.uk, paskripkin@...il.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kumarpraveen@...ux.microsoft.com,
        saurabh.truth@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/10] staging: r8188eu: Add space between function &
 macro parameters

On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 12:21:35PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > -#define PlatformEFIOWrite1Byte(_a,_b,_c)		\
> > > > -	rtw_write8(_a,_b,_c)
> > > > -#define PlatformEFIOWrite2Byte(_a,_b,_c)		\
> > > > -	rtw_write16(_a,_b,_c)
> > > > -#define PlatformEFIOWrite4Byte(_a,_b,_c)		\
> > > > -	rtw_write32(_a,_b,_c)
> > > > -
> > > > -#define PlatformEFIORead1Byte(_a,_b)		\
> > > > -		rtw_read8(_a,_b)
> > > > -#define PlatformEFIORead2Byte(_a,_b)		\
> > > > -		rtw_read16(_a,_b)
> > > > -#define PlatformEFIORead4Byte(_a,_b)		\
> > > > -		rtw_read32(_a,_b)
> > > > +#define PlatformEFIOWrite1Byte(_a, _b, _c)		\
> > > > +	rtw_write8(_a, _b, _c)
> > > > +#define PlatformEFIOWrite2Byte(_a, _b, _c)		\
> > > > +	rtw_write16(_a, _b, _c)
> > > > +#define PlatformEFIOWrite4Byte(_a, _b, _c)		\
> > > > +	rtw_write32(_a, _b, _c)
> > > > +
> > > > +#define PlatformEFIORead1Byte(_a, _b)		\
> > > > +		rtw_read8(_a, _b)
> > > > +#define PlatformEFIORead2Byte(_a, _b)		\
> > > > +		rtw_read16(_a, _b)
> > > > +#define PlatformEFIORead4Byte(_a, _b)		\
> > > > +		rtw_read32(_a, _b)
> > >
> > > Could these be inline functions?
> >
> > I am actually not seeing these macros being used anywhere. These macros were
> > added recently [commit ID: 7884fc0a1473c2721f496f1d1ddc9d2c91aefa53] in 2021. I
> > am unsure if they are intended to be used in the future or can removed entirely.
> >
> > Making these inline functions can be done, however, will we need to measure
> > performance impact? I will need help and time for this evaluation.
>
> Inline functions shouldn't have any performance impact.  For these simple
> things the compiler should inline them.

Understood. For these simple cases, it should not.
>
> The reason why a macro may be needed is if it is not possible to find a
> single type for all of the possible argument values, or if some argument
> values are assigned to by the macro definition, and not just read.

Okay. This is helpful. Thank you.

>
> I would have suggested to look at all of the uses to see if there are any
> concerns like this, but if there aren't any uses, that won't be possible.
> There seems to be no special knowledge in these macros that is worth
> preserving, so I think that they can just be dropped.

Sounds good. I will drop them in the revision.

Thank you Julia.
./drv

>
> julia
>