On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 13:30:19 +0800 Feng Tang <feng.tang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > If so, that's always best. For (silly) example, consider the behaviour > > of > > > > x = is_kmalloc_cache(s++); > > > > with and without CONFIG_SLOB. > > Another solution I can think of is putting the implementation into > slab_common.c, like the below? I'm not sure that's much of an improvement on the macro :( How about we go with the macro and avoid the expression-with-side-effects gotcha (and the potential CONFIG_SLOB=n unused-variable gotcha)? That would involve evaluating the arg within the CONFIG_SLOB=y version of the macro.
