Re: [PATCH] staging: greybus: use inline function for macros

[Menna Mahmoud]

On ١٩‏/٣‏/٢٠٢٣ ٢٣:٢٦, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2023, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
>
> > On ١٩/٣/٢٠٢٣ ٢٢:٥٥, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > On Sun, 19 Mar 2023, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
> > >
> > > > On ١٩/٣/٢٠٢٣ ٢٢:٢١, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 19 Mar 2023, Menna Mahmoud wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Convert `to_gbphy_dev` and `to_gbphy_driver` macros into a
> > > > > > static inline functions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > it is not great to have macro that use `container_of` macro,
> > > > > > because from looking at the definition one cannot tell what type
> > > > > > it applies to.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One can get the same benefit from an efficiency point of view
> > > > > > by making an inline function.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Suggested-by: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Menna Mahmoud <eng.mennamahmoud.mm@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >     drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h | 10 ++++++++--
> > > > > >     1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h
> > > > > > b/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h
> > > > > > index 1de510499480..42c4e3fe307c 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/gbphy.h
> > > > > > @@ -16,7 +16,10 @@ struct gbphy_device {
> > > > > >     	struct device dev;
> > > > > >     };
> > > > > You have made the patch against your previous patch that added a newline
> > > > > here.  It should be against Greg's tree.
> > > > >
> > > > > julia
> > > > you mean I should remove this newline, right?
> > > You should apply your change to the state of Greg's tree, not the state
> > > after your patch.
> > >
> > > Assuming that you have committed both the patch adding the new line and
> > > the patch changing the macro to a function, and have made no other
> > > changes, you can do git rebase -i HEAD~2 and the put a d at the beginning
> > > of the line related to the patch adding the newline.
> >
> > you mean drop this patch "staging: greybus: remove unnecessary blank line"?
> No, the one that removes the blank line looks fine.
>
> At some point, you added a blank line below the two structure definitions.
> That blank line is not in Greg's tree, so you shoulsn't send a patch that
> assumes that it is there.


I'm sorry I mean this patch "staging: greybus: add blank line after 
struct", Julia I understood the issue

but I am confused about how to fix it, should I drop the patch that 
added the newline? then what should I do?

and version that I have submitted, should I do anything about it as you 
said it is wrong solution?


Menna

> julia
>
> > Menna
> >
> >
> > > If you have made
> > > more changes, you can adapt the HEAD~ part accordingly.
> > >
> > > julia
> > >
> > >
> > > > Menna
> > > >
> > > > > > -#define to_gbphy_dev(d) container_of(d, struct gbphy_device, dev)
> > > > > > +static inline struct gbphy_device *to_gbphy_dev(const struct device
> > > > > > *d)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +	return container_of(d, struct gbphy_device, dev);
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     static inline void *gb_gbphy_get_data(struct gbphy_device *gdev)
> > > > > >     {
> > > > > > @@ -45,7 +48,10 @@ struct gbphy_driver {
> > > > > >     	struct device_driver driver;
> > > > > >     };
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -#define to_gbphy_driver(d) container_of(d, struct gbphy_driver,
> > > > > > driver)
> > > > > > +static inline struct gbphy_driver *to_gbphy_driver(struct
> > > > > > device_driver
> > > > > > *d)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +	return container_of(d, struct gbphy_driver, driver);
> > > > > > +}
> > > > > >
> > > > > >     int gb_gbphy_register_driver(struct gbphy_driver *driver,
> > > > > >     			     struct module *owner, const char
> > > > > > *mod_name);
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > 2.34.1
> >