On Mon, 2019-11-04 at 17:51 +0100, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 04:44:00PM +0000, Jules Irenge wrote: > > Rewrite macro function with GNU extension __auto_type > > to remove issue detected by checkpatch tool. > > CHECK: MACRO argument reuse - possible side-effects? [] > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h b/drivers/staging/rts5208/rtsx_chip.h [] > > @@ -386,23 +386,31 @@ struct zone_entry { > > > > /* SD card */ > > #define CHK_SD(sd_card) (((sd_card)->sd_type & 0xFF) == TYPE_SD) > > -#define CHK_SD_HS(sd_card) (CHK_SD(sd_card) && \ > > - ((sd_card)->sd_type & SD_HS)) [] > > +#define CHK_SD_HS(sd_card)\ > > + ({__auto_type _sd = sd_card; CHK_SD(_sd) && \ > > + (_sd->sd_type & SD_HS); }) [] > Ick, no. These are obviously pointers, which can not be "evaluated > twice" so this whole thing is just fine. > > checkpatch is just a "hint" that you might want to look at the code. > This stuff is just fine, look at how it is being used for proof of that. This would also be the first introduction and use of __auto_type in the kernel. That's not OK as __auto_type was first supported in gcc 4.9 and the kernel still compiles with gcc 4.6. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel