On Wed, 2020-08-19 at 07:00 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: > On 8/18/20 1:00 PM, James Bottomley wrote: [...] > > Since both threads seem to have petered out, let me suggest in > > kernel.h: > > > > #define cast_out(ptr, container, member) \ > > container_of(ptr, typeof(*container), member) > > > > It does what you want, the argument order is the same as > > container_of with the only difference being you name the containing > > structure instead of having to specify its type. > > Not to incessantly bike shed on the naming, but I don't like > cast_out, it's not very descriptive. And it has connotations of > getting rid of something, which isn't really true. Um, I thought it was exactly descriptive: you're casting to the outer container. I thought about following the C++ dynamic casting style, so out_cast(), but that seemed a bit pejorative. What about outer_cast()? > FWIW, I like the from_ part of the original naming, as it has some > clues as to what is being done here. Why not just from_container()? > That should immediately tell people what it does without having to > look up the implementation, even before this becomes a part of the > accepted coding norm. I'm not opposed to container_from() but it seems a little less descriptive than outer_cast() but I don't really care. I always have to look up container_of() when I'm using it so this would just be another macro of that type ... James _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
