On Sat, Apr 01, 2023 at 05:14:28PM +0800, Enze Li wrote:
> On Sat, 2023-04-01 at 09:17 +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 01, 2023 at 02:10:25PM +0800, Enze Li wrote:
> > > The pr_define macro is used only within the
> > > output_pgtable_bits_defines
> > > function, and it hasn't been used anywhere else so far. Therefore,
> > > it
> > > should be undefined when appropriate.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Enze Li <lienze@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c | 2 ++
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c b/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c
> > > index 80e05ee98d62..510a7e316eb6 100644
> > > --- a/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c
> > > +++ b/arch/mips/mm/tlbex.c
> > > @@ -255,6 +255,8 @@ static void output_pgtable_bits_defines(void)
> > > pr_define("_PAGE_DIRTY_SHIFT %d\n", _PAGE_DIRTY_SHIFT);
> > > pr_define("_PFN_SHIFT %d\n", _PFN_SHIFT);
> > > pr_debug("\n");
> > > +
> > > +#undef pr_define
> >
> > I'm probably missing something... what problem are you fixing here ?
> >
> > Thomas.
> >
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Thanks for your review. 🙂
>
> I'm trying to make the code more readable. When I first looked at this
> function, I was wondering why the pr_define macro was defined here. It
> looks more like a temporary definition, and I was also curious if it
> might be used elsewhere. After searching, I couldn't find any other
> instances of it being used, which left me feeling confused.
>
> To enhance readability, it would be good to undefine it at the end of
why is it more readable ?
> What do you think of these modifications? Will they make it more
> convenient for others who read this code?
for me the missing undef doesn't hurt as there is no rule that local
#defines need to be undefined. And less lines distracting me is a plus
Thomas.
--
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]
