On 9/30/24 13:30, Markus Elfring wrote:
…
Current scoped_guard() implementation does not support that,
due to compiler complaining:
…
+++ b/include/linux/cleanup.h
@@ -168,9 +168,16 @@ static inline class_##_name##_t class_##_name##ext##_constructor(_init_args) \
#define __guard_ptr(_name) class_##_name##_lock_ptr
-#define scoped_guard(_name, args...) \
- for (CLASS(_name, scope)(args), \
- *done = NULL; __guard_ptr(_name)(&scope) && !done; done = (void *)1)
+#define scoped_guard(_name, args...) \
+ __scoped_guard_labeled(__UNIQUE_ID(label), _name, args)
+
+#define __scoped_guard_labeled(_label, _name, args...) \
+ if (0) \
+ _label: ; \
+ else \
+ for (CLASS(_name, scope)(args); \
+ __guard_ptr(_name)(&scope), 1; \
+ ({ goto _label; }))
#define scoped_cond_guard(_name, _fail, args...) \
for (CLASS(_name, scope)(args), \
* How do you think about to define such macros before their use?
will do, no problem
* Would you ever like to avoid reserved identifiers in such source code?
https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/DCL37-C.+Do+not+declare+or+define+a+reserved+identifier
we already don't care about this guideline (see __guard_ptr())
OTOH there is DCL37-C-EX3 that says "does not apply for std lib",
and here (in the kernel) we don' need stdlib, (or for the purpose of
bureaucracy we ARE the stdlib for ourselves)
Regards,
Markus
