Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 28 Aug 2020 10:27:54 +0200 | From | peterz@infradea ... | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] seqlock: Use unique prefix for seqcount_t property accessors |
| |
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 03:07:07AM +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote: > Differentiate the first group by using "__seqcount_t_" as prefix. This > also conforms with the rest of seqlock.h naming conventions.
> #define __seqprop_case(s, locktype, prop) \ > seqcount_##locktype##_t: __seqcount_##locktype##_##prop((void *)(s)) > > #define __seqprop(s, prop) _Generic(*(s), \ > - seqcount_t: __seqcount_##prop((void *)(s)), \ > + seqcount_t: __seqcount_t_##prop((void *)(s)), \ > __seqprop_case((s), raw_spinlock, prop), \ > __seqprop_case((s), spinlock, prop), \ > __seqprop_case((s), rwlock, prop), \
If instead you do:
#define __seqprop_case(s, _lockname, prop) \ seqcount##_lockname##_t: __seqcount##_lockname##_##prop((void *)(s))
You can have:
__seqprop_case((s), , prop), __seqprop_case((s), _raw_spinlock, prop), __seqprop_case((s), _spinlock, prop), __seqprop_case((s), _rwlock, prop), __seqprop_case((s), _mutex, prop), __seqprop_case((s), _ww_mutex, prop),
And it's all good again.
Although arguably we should do something like s/__seqcount/__seqprop/ over this lot.
| |