Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180711160547.59f086a587c7f3c8d3c40f0f@linux-foundation.org>
References: <20180709083650.23549-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
 <20180709162509.29343-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <20180709163001.8fb8148223a57bc46a13fbda@linux-foundation.org>
 <20180710075328.GG3008@phenom.ffwll.local> <871scbwfd4.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
 <CAKMK7uFEYyD2ChWnO_0PS_rkK180dDoQ1g4J0UWRfchnYQxOTA@mail.gmail.com> <20180711160547.59f086a587c7f3c8d3c40f0f@linux-foundation.org>
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Date:   Thu, 12 Jul 2018 08:39:50 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKMK7uHak=JTsO0Lb8UDpgXF_xvUOTjocTKi3jFgR1ZDFZX57w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel.h: Add for_each_if()
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Intel Graphics Development <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
        Sean Paul <seanpaul@chromium.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Wei Wang <wvw@google.com>, Stefan Agner <stefan@agner.ch>,
        Andrei Vagin <avagin@openvz.org>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Yisheng Xie <ysxie@foxmail.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 1:05 AM, Andrew Morton
<akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:51:08 +0200 Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> But I still have the situation that a bunch of maintainers acked this
>> and Andrew Morton defacto nacked it, which I guess means I'll keep the
>> macro in drm? The common way to go about this seems to be to just push
>> the patch series with the ack in some pull request to Linus and ignore
>> the people who raised questions, but not really my thing.
>
> Heh.
>
> But, am I wrong?  Code which uses regular kernel style doesn't have
> these issues.  We shouldn't be enabling irregular style - we should be
> making such sites more regular.  The fact that the compiler generates a
> nice warning in some cases simply helps us with that.

Yes liberal sprinkling of {} per coding style fixes it too. But given
that the if (!cond) ; else pattern is fairly common even outside of
drm it seems like not just graphics people think that little bit of
added robustness in iterator macros is worth it. Only reason I
bothered with this is because I've seen another open-coded version of
this pattern fly by.

Anyway I'm going on vacations for a few weeks now. Andy/Yisheng, I
guess if you want this it's up to you to haggle for a consensus around
this. If that doesn't happen I'm happy to keep it in drm headers.
-Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch