[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aW3pgf4FQHFCC9Bm@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 10:21:21 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...nel.org>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev,
llvm@...ts.linux.dev, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] printf: convert test_hashed into macro
On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 11:27:03AM -0500, Tamir Duberstein wrote:
> This allows the compiler to check the arguments against the __printf
__printf() since it takes parameters, OTOH it's an attribute at the end,
so I have no strong opinion on how to spell it.
> attribute on __test. This produces better diagnostics when incorrect
__test()
*This is reference to a function.
> inputs are passed.
...
> +/*
> + * This is a macro so that the compiler can compare its arguments to the
> + * __printf attribute on __test. This cannot be a function with a __printf
> + * attribute because GCC requires __printf functions to be variadic.
As per commit message remarks.
> + */
> +#define test_hashed(kunittest, fmt, p) \
> + do { \
> + char buf[PLAIN_BUF_SIZE]; \
> + plain_hash_to_buffer(kunittest, p, buf, PLAIN_BUF_SIZE); \
> + test(buf, fmt, p); \
> + } while (0)
Make sure you used tabs to indent the \:s.
...
The downside of a macro is a killing of compile-time type checks.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists