Re: [patch 2/3] ps3: BD/DVD/CD-ROM Storage Driver

On Thu, Jul 19 2007, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:

quoted

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:02:07 +0200 (CEST) Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:

quoted

quoted

+struct ps3rom_private {
+	struct ps3_storage_device *dev;
+	struct scsi_cmnd *curr_cmd;
+};
+#define ps3rom_priv(dev)	((dev)->sbd.core.driver_data)
+

Someone should invent a keyboard which delivers an electric shock when the
operator types "#define".   In the meanwhile, I get to do the honours.

Please don't implement in a macro anything which can be implemented in C.

All I needed was a shorthand to access driver_data, for both read and write
access (you cannot do the latter with C, unless you decouple read and write).

Oh dear.

	ps3rom_priv(dev) = host;

that's 'orrid.  We have an identifier pretending to be a function, only we
go and treat it as an lvalue.

I mean, C code should look like C code, and the above just doesn't.

Sigh.

Do you prefer

static inline struct ps3rom_private *ps3rom_priv_get(struct ps3_storage_device
*dev)
{
	return dev->sbd.core.driver_data;
}

static inline void ps3rom_priv_set(struct ps3_storage_device *dev,
				   struct ps3rom_private *priv)
{
	dev->sbd.core.driver_data = priv;
}

how about just killing them? it makes the code harder to read, what is
the point of abstracting something like that out?

-- 
Jens Axboe