netdev - Re: [PATCH] decnet: remove macro-local declarations

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]

Date:	Thu, 05 Nov 2015 15:13:20 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	julia.lawall@...6.fr
Cc:	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-decnet-user@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lkp@...el.com,
	roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, rshearma@...cade.com,
	ebiederm@...ssion.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] decnet: remove macro-local declarations

From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 21:08:17 +0100 (CET)

> On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, David Miller wrote:
> 
>> From: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>
>> Date: Thu,  5 Nov 2015 11:18:16 +0100
>> 
>> > Move the variable declarations from the for_nexthops macro to the
>> > surrounding context, so that it is clear where these variables are
>> > declared.  This also makes it possible to remove the endfor_nexthops macro.
>> > 
>> > This change adds new arguments to the macro for_nexthops.  They are ordered
>> > such that a pointer to the referenced object comes first, the index in the
>> > list comes next, and the list itself comes last, roughly in analogy with
>> > the list_for_each macros.
>> > 
>> > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>
>> > 
>> > ---
>> > 
>> > This patch takes care of a single file, where the macros are defined
>> > locally.  If the basic transformation looks OK, I will change the other
>> > files that either likewise define their own macros or use the macros in
>> > net/mpls/internal.h.  The potentially affected files are:
>>  ...
>> 
>> This looks fine to me.
> 
> Would it be preferable to remove the macro entirely and inline the for 
> loop header?

Could you show me an example of how this would look exactly?
--
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