[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y34zyzdbRUdyOSkA@casper.infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2022 14:52:59 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Sean Young <sean@...s.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
Bard Liao <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>,
Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>,
Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@...dia.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>,
Jilin Yuan <yuanjilin@...rlc.com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Won Chung <wonchung@...gle.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] driver core: make struct device_type.uevent() take a
const *
On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 02:59:00PM +0100, Maximilian Luz wrote:
> On 11/23/22 14:34, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 02:14:31PM +0100, Maximilian Luz wrote:
> > > On 11/23/22 13:25, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > The uevent() callback in struct device_type should not be modifying the
> > > > device that is passed into it, so mark it as a const * and propagate the
> > > > function signature changes out into all relevant subsystems that use
> > > > this callback.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > -static inline struct ssam_device *to_ssam_device(struct device *d)
> > > > +static inline struct ssam_device *to_ssam_device(const struct device *d)
> > > > {
> > > > return container_of(d, struct ssam_device, dev);
> > > > }
> > >
> > > I am slightly conflicted about this change as that now more or less
> > > implicitly drops the const. So I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better to
> > > either create a function specifically for const pointers or to just
> > > open-code it in the instance above.
> > >
> > > I guess we could also convert this to a macro. Then at least there
> > > wouldn't be an explicit and potentially misleading const-conversion
> > > indicated in the function signature.
> >
> > This is an intermediate step as far as I know since moving container_of to
> > recognize const is a bit noisy right now. I guess you can find a discussion
> > on the topic between Greg and Sakari.
>
> Thanks! I assume you are referring to the following?
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/4218173bd72b4f1899d4c41a8e251f0d@AcuMS.aculab.com/T/
>
> As far as I can tell this is only a warning in documentation, not
> compile time (which would probably be impossible?).
>
> As I've said I'd be fine with converting the function to a macro (and
> preferably adding a similar warning like the one proposed in that
> thread). The point that irks me up is just that, as proposed, the
> function signature would now advertise a conversion that should never be
> happening.
>
> Having two separate functions would create a compile-time guarantee, so
> I'd prefer that, but I can understand if that might be considered too
> noisy in code. Or if there is a push to make container_of() emit a
> compile-time warning I'd also be perfectly happy with converting it to a
> macro now as that'd alleviate the need for functions in the future.
Can't we do:
static inline const struct ssam_device *to_ssam_device(const struct device *d)
{
return container_of(d, const struct ssam_device, dev);
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists