On 9/29/22 12:02 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 9/28/22 19:53, Mike Christie wrote:
>> +/* Make sure any sense buffer is the correct size. */
>> +#define scsi_exec_req(_args) \
>> +({ \
>> + BUILD_BUG_ON(_args.sense && \
>> + _args.sense_len != SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE); \
>> + __scsi_exec_req(&_args); \
>> +})
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> I will take a close look at the entire patch series when I have the time.
> So far I only have one question: if _args would be surrounded with
> parentheses in the above macro, would that allow to leave out one pair of
> parentheses from the code that uses this macro? Would that allow to write
> scsi_exec_req((struct scsi_exec_args){...}) instead of
> scsi_exec_req(((struct scsi_exec_args){...}))?
>
You mean like:
#define scsi_exec_req(_args) \
({ \
BUILD_BUG_ON((_args).sense && \
(_args).sense_len != SCSI_SENSE_BUFFERSIZE); \
__scsi_exec_req(&(_args)); \
})
right? That didn't help. You still get the error:
error: macro "scsi_exec_req" passed 8 arguments, but takes just 1
