Re: [PATCH] omap2/omapfb: make DBG() more resistant in if-else constructions

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 11:20, Niels de Vos <ndevos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> When DBG() is used in a simple if-else, the resulting code path
> currently depends on the definition of DBG(). Inserting the statement in
> a "do { ... } while (0)" prevents this possible misuse.
>
> Signed-off-by: Niels de Vos <ndevos@xxxxxxxxxx>

> --- a/drivers/video/omap2/omapfb/omapfb.h
> +++ b/drivers/video/omap2/omapfb/omapfb.h
> @@ -34,8 +34,10 @@
> Â#ifdef DEBUG
> Âextern unsigned int omapfb_debug;
> Â#define DBG(format, ...) \
> - Â Â Â if (omapfb_debug) \
> - Â Â Â Â Â Â Â printk(KERN_DEBUG "OMAPFB: " format, ## __VA_ARGS__)
> + Â Â Â do { \
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â if (omapfb_debug) \
> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â printk(KERN_DEBUG "OMAPFB: " format, ## __VA_ARGS__); \
> + Â Â Â while (0)

Where's the closing '}'?

> Â#else
> Â#define DBG(format, ...)

BTW, no printf()-style format checking here.

> Â#endif

What about using the standard pr_debug()/dev_dbg() instead?
With dynamic debug, it can be enabled at run time.
As a bonus, you get printf()-style format checking if debugging is disabled.


Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

            Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
             Â Â -- Linus Torvalds
--
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/