lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: dealing with excessive includes
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:04:24AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > +#define lock_super(x) do { \
> > + struct super_block *sb = x; \
> > + get_fs_excl(); \
> > + mutex_lock(&sb->s_lock); \
> > +} while(0)
>
> Don't do this. The "x" passed in may be "sb", and then you end up with
> bogus code.

For this one, I see a third way:

#define lock_super(sb) do { \
get_fs_excl(); \
mutex_lock(&(sb)->s_lock); \
} while (0)

It does have the disadvantage that you can pass *anything* that has
an s_lock field in ... but I don't think that's a very likely thing
to happen.

Or you could use _sb as the local variable, since it's a reserved
identifier.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-10-18 17:17    [W:0.169 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site