Re: [PATCH] staging: bcm2835-camera: call function instead of macro

On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 12:47:47AM +0530, Kaaira Gupta wrote:

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:37:11PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 09:37:28PM +0530, Kaaira Gupta wrote:

quoted

Fix checkpatch.pl warning of 'macro argument reuse' in bcm2835-camera.h
by removing the macro and calling the function, written in macro in
bcm2835-camera.h, directly in bcm2835-camera.c

Signed-off-by: Kaaira Gupta <redacted>
---
 .../bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c           | 28 +++++++++++++++----
 .../bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.h           | 10 -------
 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c
index 1ef31a984741..19b3ba80d0e7 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c

@@ -919,9 +919,17 @@ static int vidioc_g_fmt_vid_cap(struct file *file, void *priv,
 	else
 		f->fmt.pix.colorspace = V4L2_COLORSPACE_SMPTE170M;
 	f->fmt.pix.priv = 0;
-
-	v4l2_dump_pix_format(1, bcm2835_v4l2_debug, &dev->v4l2_dev, &f->fmt.pix,
-			     __func__);
+	v4l2_dbg(1, bcm2835_v4l2_debug, &dev->v4l2_dev,
+		 "%s: w %u h %u field %u pfmt 0x%x bpl %u sz_img %u colorspace 0x%x priv %u\n",
+		  __func__,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->width,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->height,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->field,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->pixelformat,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->bytesperline,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->sizeimage,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->colorspace,
+		 (&f->fmt.pix)->priv);

This is not as nice to look at as the original.  Just ignore the
warning.

regards,
dan carpenter

So, is this warning to be ignored from everywhere in every driver, as it
doesn't look good? And if yes, then why is it there in the first place?

Obviously the reason for the warning is a good idea.  Do a google
search for the dangers of c macros if you don't understand.

But at the same time uniformity and clean code is nice so it's a matter
of setting priorities.  Checkpatch is just a Perl script and not the
King of The World.  We can ignore it if we want to.

regards,
dan carpenter


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel