Re: [RFC patch 3/5] ftrace trace event add missing semicolumn

[Valdis . Kletnieks]

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 04:10:18 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker said:
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 10:01:33PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> > Can DEFINE_EVENT ever be sensibly used in a context where the additional ; will
> > cause an issue (for instance, a hypothetical array initialization like:
> >
> > static struct events[] = {DEFINE_EVENT(..), DEFINE_EVENT(...) }

> You can't do the above as DEFINE_EVENT() do more than just creating a structure.
> It can define functions and so.
>
> Plus it doesn't behave the same whether CREATE_TRACE_POINTS is defined or not:
> it can either define or declare the functions and structures.
>
> > or other places we usually do the 'do { X } while (0)' trick to make the code legal?
>
> I just can't figure out a sane case.

OK..  I was wondering if there was a corner case where we had to resolve the
one versus two semicolon issue in a specific way to guarantee syntactic
correctness, but it looks like this one gets to fight it out on taste/style
grounds...

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature