On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 12:44:34PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:

On 8/17/20 12:29 PM, Kees Cook wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 06:56:47AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:

quoted

On 8/17/20 2:15 AM, Allen Pais wrote:

quoted

From: Allen Pais <redacted>

In preparation for unconditionally passing the
struct tasklet_struct pointer to all tasklet
callbacks, switch to using the new tasklet_setup()
and from_tasklet() to pass the tasklet pointer explicitly.

Who came up with the idea to add a macro 'from_tasklet' that is just
container_of? container_of in the code would be _much_ more readable,
and not leave anyone guessing wtf from_tasklet is doing.

I'd fix that up now before everything else goes in...

As I mentioned in the other thread, I think this makes things much more
readable. It's the same thing that the timer_struct conversion did
(added a container_of wrapper) to avoid the ever-repeating use of
typeof(), long lines, etc.

But then it should use a generic name, instead of each sub-system using
some random name that makes people look up exactly what it does. I'm not
huge fan of the container_of() redundancy, but adding private variants
of this doesn't seem like the best way forward. Let's have a generic
helper that does this, and use it everywhere.

I'm open to suggestions, but as things stand, these kinds of treewide
changes end up getting whole-release delays because of the need to have
the API in place for everyone before patches to do the changes can be
sent to multiple maintainers, etc.

-- 
Kees Cook