On Mon, 12 Feb 2024 12:58:03 +0000
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 02:46:49PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 12:36:46PM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:42:06AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > Hmm. In that case I'd rather make fwnode_handle_put() and similar trivial
> > > functions macros.
> >
> > This will kill the type-checking opportunity, so I'm against this move.
>
> Then it could be made static inline and moved to the header. I suppose for
> modern compilers there should be no difference in between the two
> optimisation-wise.
>
Sure - will be a bit fiddly as this is only worth doing if we drop
the internal check that buried several macros deep.
1. rename existing fwnode_handle_put() to __fwnode_handle_put()
2. Make __fwnode_handle_put() call a new set of macros
#define fwnode_has_op_nocheck(fwnode, op) \
(fwnode)->ops && (fwnode)->ops->op
#define fwnode_call_void_op_nocheck(fwnode, op, .... \
do {
if (fwnode_had_op_nocheck(fwnode, op)) \
(fwnode)->ops->op(fwnode, ## __VA_ARGS__);
} while (false);
3. Add new
static inline fwnode_handle_put(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
{
if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fwnode))
__fwnode_handle_put(fwnode);
}
Or something like that.
I'm fine with doing that if conclusion is the complexity of the change
is worth it.
Jonathan
