On 04/25/2014 07:21 AM, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 10:48:22AM -0300, Nicolas Del Piano wrote:Fixed a coding style error, macros with complex values should be enclosed in parentheses. Signed-off-by: Nicolas Del Piano <ndel314@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/staging/octeon-usb/octeon-hcd.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/octeon-usb/octeon-hcd.c b/drivers/staging/octeon-usb/octeon-hcd.c index 8b8ce72..ef3a8ce 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/octeon-usb/octeon-hcd.c +++ b/drivers/staging/octeon-usb/octeon-hcd.c @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ enum cvmx_usb_pipe_flags { }; /* Normal prefetch that use the pref instruction. */ -#define CVMX_PREFETCH(address, offset) asm volatile ("pref %[type], %[off](%[rbase])" : : [rbase] "d" (address), [off] "I" (offset), [type] "n" (0)) +#define CVMX_PREFETCH(address, offset) (asm volatile ("pref %[type], %[off](%[rbase])" : : [rbase] "d" (address), [off] "I" (offset), [type] "n" (0))) /* Maximum number of times to retry failed transactions */ #define MAX_RETRIES 3Will that actually compile?
No it does not. Really when changing things like this, you should first understand what it is doing. In the case of this patch, I don't think that understanding was present.
It appears that in the case of this patch, Documentation/SubmitChecklist was not consulted. In particular item #2(all sections) was omitted.
Q: Why did I have to waste 15 minutes of my day on this? Is the patch subimtter's time so valuable that standard patch submittal procedures cannot be followed?
Why the heck are we using asm in a define in the first place? Shouldn't this be an inline function or something?
You are correct. It turns out that <linux/prefetch.h> already has such a definition.
thanks, greg k-h
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
