Re: [PATCH v2 26/40] arch/sparc: uaccess_64 macro whitespace fixes
From: Sam Ravnborg <hidden>
Date: 2015-01-06 17:03:24
Also in:
lkml, sparclinux
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 05:44:56PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Macros within arch/sparc/include/asm/uaccess_64.h are made harder to read because they violate a bunch of coding style rules. Fix it up.
As per Davem's earlier mail please prefix using sparc32/sparc64.
-#define __put_user_nocheck(data,addr,size) ({ \
-register int __pu_ret; \
-switch (size) { \
-case 1: __put_user_asm(data,b,addr,__pu_ret); break; \
-case 2: __put_user_asm(data,h,addr,__pu_ret); break; \
-case 4: __put_user_asm(data,w,addr,__pu_ret); break; \
-case 8: __put_user_asm(data,x,addr,__pu_ret); break; \
-default: __pu_ret = __put_user_bad(); break; \
-} __pu_ret; })
-
-#define __put_user_asm(x,size,addr,ret) \
+#define __put_user_nocheck(data, addr, size) ({ \
+ register int __pu_ret; \
+ switch (size) { \
+ case 1: \
+ __put_user_asm(data, b, addr, __pu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ case 2: \
+ __put_user_asm(data, h, addr, __pu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ case 4: \
+ __put_user_asm(data, w, addr, __pu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ case 8: \
+ __put_user_asm(data, x, addr, __pu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ default: \
+ __pu_ret = __put_user_bad(); \
+ break; \
+ } \
+ __pu_ret; \
+})No matter what coding style says - the above is much less readable than the original version.
-#define __get_user_nocheck(data,addr,size,type) ({ \
-register int __gu_ret; \
-register unsigned long __gu_val; \
-switch (size) { \
-case 1: __get_user_asm(__gu_val,ub,addr,__gu_ret); break; \
-case 2: __get_user_asm(__gu_val,uh,addr,__gu_ret); break; \
-case 4: __get_user_asm(__gu_val,uw,addr,__gu_ret); break; \
-case 8: __get_user_asm(__gu_val,x,addr,__gu_ret); break; \
-default: __gu_val = 0; __gu_ret = __get_user_bad(); break; \
-} data = (__force type) __gu_val; __gu_ret; })
-
-#define __get_user_nocheck_ret(data,addr,size,type,retval) ({ \
-register unsigned long __gu_val __asm__ ("l1"); \
-switch (size) { \
-case 1: __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val,ub,addr,retval); break; \
-case 2: __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val,uh,addr,retval); break; \
-case 4: __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val,uw,addr,retval); break; \
-case 8: __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val,x,addr,retval); break; \
-default: if (__get_user_bad()) return retval; \
-} data = (__force type) __gu_val; })
-
-#define __get_user_asm(x,size,addr,ret) \
+#define __get_user_nocheck(data, addr, size, type) ({ \
+ register int __gu_ret; \
+ register unsigned long __gu_val; \
+ switch (size) { \
+ case 1: \
+ __get_user_asm(__gu_val, ub, addr, __gu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ case 2: \
+ __get_user_asm(__gu_val, uh, addr, __gu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ case 4: \
+ __get_user_asm(__gu_val, uw, addr, __gu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ case 8: \
+ __get_user_asm(__gu_val, x, addr, __gu_ret); \
+ break; \
+ default: \
+ __gu_val = 0; \
+ __gu_ret = __get_user_bad(); \
+ break; \
+ } data = (__force type) __gu_val; __gu_ret; \
+})
+
+#define __get_user_nocheck_ret(data, addr, size, type, retval) ({ \
+ register unsigned long __gu_val __asm__ ("l1"); \
+ switch (size) { \
+ case 1: \
+ __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val, ub, addr, retval); \
+ break; \
+ case 2: \
+ __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val, uh, addr, retval); \
+ break; \
+ case 4: \
+ __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val, uw, addr, retval); \
+ break; \
+ case 8: \
+ __get_user_asm_ret(__gu_val, x, addr, retval); \
+ break; \
+ default: \
+ if (__get_user_bad()) \
+ return retval; \
+ } \
+ data = (__force type) __gu_val; \
+})
+Same comment for this code chunk. Sam