Re: [RESEND PATCH v5 3/5] drivers core: allow probe_err accept integer and pointer types

[Andrzej Hajda]

On 24.06.2020 17:16, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2020-06-24 16:04, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 03:25:33PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
>>
>>> And yeah, anyone who pipes up suggesting that places where an 
>>> ERR_PTR value
>>> could be passed to probe_err() could simply refactor IS_ERR() checks 
>>> with
>>> more uses of the god-awful PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO() obfuscator gets a long 
>>> stare of
>>> disapproval...
>>
>> We could also have a probe_err_ptr() or something that took an ERR_PTR()
>> instead if there really were an issue with explicitly doing this.
>
> Yeah, for all my lyrical objection, a static inline <blah>_ptr_err() 
> helper to wrap <blah>_err() with sensible type checking might actually 
> be an OK compromise if people really feel strongly for having that 
> utility.


I have proposed such thing in my previous iteration[1], except it was 
macro because of variadic arguments.

With current version we save 8 chars and hacky macro, with the old 
version we save only 4 chars and more clear construct - less tempting 
solution for me.

Personally I prefer the current version - it does not seems to me more 
dangerous than all these PTR_ERR, IS_ERR,ERR_PTR helpers, but can 
prevent expression split across multiple lines due to 80char limit.

Probably the simplest solution is to drop this patch, I will do it then.

[1]: 
https://lwn.net/ml/linux-kernel/20181220102247.4911-4-a.hajda@xxxxxxxxxxx/


Regards

Andrzej


>
> (and then we can debate whether it should also convert NULL to -ENOMEM 
> and !IS_ERR to 0... :D)
>
> Robin.
> _______________________________________________
> dri-devel mailing list
> dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=074420c0-5ada8e5a-0745ab8f-0cc47a336fae-bba8bb4caf96e14d&q=1&u=https%3A%2F%2Flists.freedesktop.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fdri-devel 
>
>