> On Apr 14, 2019, at 3:14 AM, Shyam Saini <shyam.saini@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Currently, there are 3 different macros, namely sizeof_field, SIZEOF_FIELD
> and FIELD_SIZEOF which are used to calculate the size of a member of
> structure, so to bring uniformity in entire kernel source tree lets use
> FIELD_SIZEOF and replace all occurrences of other two macros with this.
>
> For this purpose, redefine FIELD_SIZEOF in include/linux/stddef.h and
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_util.h and remove its defination from
> include/linux/kernel.h
> --- a/include/linux/stddef.h
> +++ b/include/linux/stddef.h
> @@ -20,6 +20,15 @@ enum {
> #endif
>
> /**
> + * FIELD_SIZEOF - get the size of a struct's field
> + * @t: the target struct
> + * @f: the target struct's field
> + * Return: the size of @f in the struct definition without having a
> + * declared instance of @t.
> + */
> +#define FIELD_SIZEOF(t, f) (sizeof(((t *)0)->f))
> +
> +/**
> * sizeof_field(TYPE, MEMBER)
> *
> * @TYPE: The structure containing the field of interest
> @@ -34,6 +43,6 @@ enum {
> * @MEMBER: The member within the structure to get the end offset of
> */
> #define offsetofend(TYPE, MEMBER) \
> - (offsetof(TYPE, MEMBER) + sizeof_field(TYPE, MEMBER))
> + (offsetof(TYPE, MEMBER) + FIELD_SIZEOF(TYPE, MEMBER))
If you're doing this, why are you leaving the definition of sizeof_field() in
stddef.h untouched?
Given the way this has worked historically, if you are leaving it in place for
source compatibility reasons, shouldn't it be redefined in terms of
FIELD_SIZEOF(), e.g.:
#define sizeof_field(TYPE, MEMBER) FIELD_SIZEOF(TYPE, MEMBER)
