Re: dealing with excessive includes

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 08:04:24AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2006, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > +#define lock_super(x) do {		\
> > +	struct super_block *sb = x;	\
> > +	get_fs_excl();			\
> > +	mutex_lock(&sb->s_lock);	\
> > +} while(0)
> 
> Don't do this. The "x" passed in may be "sb", and then you end up with 
> bogus code.

For this one, I see a third way:

#define lock_super(sb) do {		\
	get_fs_excl();			\
	mutex_lock(&(sb)->s_lock);	\
} while (0)

It does have the disadvantage that you can pass *anything* that has
an s_lock field in ... but I don't think that's a very likely thing
to happen.

Or you could use _sb as the local variable, since it's a reserved
identifier.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/