linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ath9k: use proper statements in conditionals

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: <87k02sd1uz.fsf@toke.dk>
Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 18:16:04 +0100
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...e.dk>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
        Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath9k: use proper statements in conditionals

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> writes:

> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>
> A previous cleanup patch accidentally broke some conditional
> expressions by replacing the safe "do {} while (0)" constructs
> with empty macros. gcc points this out when extra warnings
> are enabled:
>
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hif_usb.c: In function 'ath9k_skb_queue_complete':
> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/hif_usb.c:251:57: error: suggest braces around empty body in an 'else' statement [-Werror=empty-body]
>   251 |                         TX_STAT_INC(hif_dev, skb_failed);
>
> Make both sets of macros proper expressions again.
>
> Fixes: d7fc76039b74 ("ath9k: htc: clean up statistics macros")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc.h | 14 +++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc.h b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc.h
> index 30f0765fb9fd..237f4ec2cffd 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/htc.h
> @@ -327,9 +327,9 @@ static inline struct ath9k_htc_tx_ctl *HTC_SKB_CB(struct sk_buff *skb)
>  }
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_ATH9K_HTC_DEBUGFS
> -#define __STAT_SAFE(hif_dev, expr)	((hif_dev)->htc_handle->drv_priv ? (expr) : 0)
> -#define CAB_STAT_INC(priv)		((priv)->debug.tx_stats.cab_queued++)
> -#define TX_QSTAT_INC(priv, q)		((priv)->debug.tx_stats.queue_stats[q]++)
> +#define __STAT_SAFE(hif_dev, expr)	do { ((hif_dev)->htc_handle->drv_priv ? (expr) : 0); } while (0)
> +#define CAB_STAT_INC(priv)		do { ((priv)->debug.tx_stats.cab_queued++); } while (0)
> +#define TX_QSTAT_INC(priv, q)		do { ((priv)->debug.tx_stats.queue_stats[q]++); } while (0)

Hmm, is it really necessary to wrap these in do/while constructs? AFAICT
they're all simple statements already?

-Toke