lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Cleaning up code formatting errors in net/wireless pointed out by checkpatch.
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:45:44 -0800
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 07:30 -0800, Luis Felipe Strano Moraes wrote:
> > These are mostly minor changes and they are being sent as one patch only in
> > order to cause the smallest amount of disruption.
> []
> > diff --git a/net/wireless/core.c b/net/wireless/core.c
> []
> > @@ -668,7 +668,7 @@ void wiphy_unregister(struct wiphy *wiphy)
> > mutex_lock(&rdev->devlist_mtx);
> > __count = rdev->opencount;
> > mutex_unlock(&rdev->devlist_mtx);
> > - __count == 0;}));
> > + __count == 0; }));
>
> Inline statement expressions are pretty unusual
> for kernel sources. Normally these are used via
> macro.
>
> I'd try to make the statement expression visually
> distinct. Something like:
>
> wait_event(rdev->dev_wait,
> ({
> int __count;
> mutex_lock(&rdev->devlist_mtx);
> __count = rdev->opencount;
> mutex_unlock(&rdev->devlist_mtx);
> __count == 0;
> })
> );
>

I prefer to see this done as an inline function

wait_event(rdev->dev_wait, is_foo_ready(rdev))

Also, in this case wrapping a condition with a mutex really is
meaningless because the state is longer protected out side the
protected region; in other words the mutex here is bogus and
provides no additional protection.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-17 20:09    [W:0.085 / U:4.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site