[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8B167AFF-755D-4389-BF31-69A6175B7B76@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:16:55 +0000
From: "Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@...el.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC: "Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>,
"sassmann@...hat.com" <sassmann@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next v4 3/7] ixgbe: Use static inlines instead of macros
On Jan 14, 2014, at 7:17 PM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-01-14 at 18:53 -0800, Aaron Brown wrote:
>> From: Mark Rustad <mark.d.rustad@...el.com>
>
> trivia:
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_common.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_common.h
> []
>> @@ -124,24 +124,40 @@ s32 ixgbe_reset_pipeline_82599(struct ixgbe_hw *hw);
> []
>> -#define IXGBE_WRITE_REG(a, reg, value) writel((value), ((a)->hw_addr + (reg)))
>> +static inline void ixgbe_write_reg(struct ixgbe_hw *hw, u32 reg, u32 value)
>> +{
>> + writel(value, hw->hw_addr + reg);
>> +}
>> +#define IXGBE_WRITE_REG(a, reg, value) ixgbe_write_reg((a), (reg), (value))
>
> There's no real value in adding parentheses to these macros.
I suppose that is true in this case. I have it so ingrained to always put parens around the macro parameter references, that I just automatically do it. Still, it makes it safer for any future changes, though the most likely next change here will be deletion anyway. :-)
--
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists