On Sun, 24 Jul 2016, walter harms wrote: > > > Am 23.07.2016 16:56, schrieb Julia Lawall: > > Code like the following looks a bit clunky to me: > > > > if (IS_ERR(data->clk) && PTR_ERR(data->clk) != -EPROBE_DEFER) > > > > Is there any reason not to always use eg > > > > data->clk == ERR_PTR(-EPROBE_DEFER) > > > > Code of the latter form is a bit more popular. Perhaps one could want > > something like: > > > > IS_ERR_VALUE(data->clk, -EPROBE_DEFER) > > > > but IS_ERR_VALUE is laready used for something else. > > > > note: i do not like hiding behind #defines > > did you actually see code like IS_ERR_VALUE(data->clk, -EPROBE_DEFER) > in the current kernel ? No, no. It's the combination of English words I thought would be useful for expressing the concept. But it's already used for something else. julia > because there is no second argument: > > #define IS_ERR_VALUE(x) unlikely((x) >= (unsigned long)-MAX_ERRNO) > > or is this a misunderstanding ? > > re, > wh > > > julia > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
