Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751302AbeADXNK (ORCPT + 1 other); Thu, 4 Jan 2018 18:13:10 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:33999 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751029AbeADXNJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jan 2018 18:13:09 -0500 Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 15:13:07 -0800 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Rao Shoaib Cc: Boqun Feng , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, brouer@redhat.com, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Move kfree_call_rcu() to slab_common.c Message-ID: <20180104231307.GA794@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <1514923898-2495-1-git-send-email-rao.shoaib@oracle.com> <20180102222341.GB20405@bombadil.infradead.org> <3be609d4-800e-a89e-f885-7e0f5d288862@oracle.com> <20180104013807.GA31392@tardis> <64ca3929-4044-9393-a6ca-70c0a2589a35@oracle.com> <20180104214658.GA20740@bombadil.infradead.org> <3e4ea0b9-686f-7e36-d80c-8577401517e2@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <3e4ea0b9-686f-7e36-d80c-8577401517e2@oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 02:18:50PM -0800, Rao Shoaib wrote: > > > > > +#define kfree_rcu(ptr, rcu_head_name) \ > > > > > +??? do { \ > > > > > +??????? typeof(ptr) __ptr = ptr;??? \ > > > > > +??????? unsigned long __off = offsetof(typeof(*(__ptr)), \ > > > > > +????????????????????????????? rcu_head_name); \ > > > > > +??????? struct rcu_head *__rptr = (void *)__ptr + __off; \ > > > > > +??????? __kfree_rcu(__rptr, __off); \ > > > > > +??? } while (0) > > > > why do you want to open code this? > > But why are you changing this macro at all? If it was to avoid the > > double-mention of "ptr", then you haven't done that. > I have -- I do not get the error because ptr is being assigned only one. If > you have a better way than let me know and I will be happy to make the > change. But look at the original: #define kfree_rcu(ptr, rcu_head) \ __kfree_rcu(&((ptr)->rcu_head), offsetof(typeof(*(ptr)), rcu_head)) ^^^ ^^^ versus your version: +#define kfree_rcu(ptr, rcu_head_name) \ +??? do { \ +??????? typeof(ptr) __ptr = ptr;??? \ ^^^ ^^^ +??????? unsigned long __off = offsetof(typeof(*(__ptr)), \ +????????????????????????????? rcu_head_name); \ +??????? struct rcu_head *__rptr = (void *)__ptr + __off; \ +??????? __kfree_rcu(__rptr, __off); \ +??? } while (0) I don't see the difference.