Re: container-of Implementation

[Mikael Pettersson]

Schrober writes:
 > Hi,
 > 
 > I wondered why the container_of implementation is so complicated.
 > 
 > #define container_of(ptr, type, member) ({			\
 > 	const typeof( ((type *)0)->member ) *__mptr = (ptr);	\
 > 	(type *)( (char *)__mptr - offsetof(type,member) );})
 > 
 > isn't the __mptr not unnecessary? Why not following version?
 > 
 > #define container_of(ptr, type, member) \
 >     ((type *)((char *)(ptr) - offsetof(type, member)))

Compile-time type checking.  The first version requires ptr to be
assignment-compatible with the type of the struct member, the second
version accepts random junk for ptr.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/