Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] seqlock: avoid -Wshadow warnings
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        "Ahmed S. Darwish" <a.darwish@linutronix.de>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20201026165044.3722931-1-arnd@kernel.org>
 <20201026165805.GS2594@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAK8P3a3wDEKSn307UXbc33+Uqu-NDV2V=0dDKbYJpAtgZjDNkQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Message-ID: <af5b457c-6615-0b4c-0add-529a28454459@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Date:   Wed, 28 Oct 2020 08:51:29 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a3wDEKSn307UXbc33+Uqu-NDV2V=0dDKbYJpAtgZjDNkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 28/10/2020 00.34, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 5:58 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 05:50:38PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>
>>> -     unsigned seq;                                                   \
>>> +     unsigned __seq;                                                 \
>>
>>> -     unsigned seq = __read_seqcount_begin(s);                        \
>>> +     unsigned _seq = __read_seqcount_begin(s);                       \
>>
>>> -     unsigned seq = __seqcount_sequence(s);                          \
>>> +     unsigned __seq = __seqcount_sequence(s);                        \
>>
>> Can we have a consistent number of leading '_' ?
> 
> Not really ;-)
> 
> The warning comes from raw_read_seqcount_begin() calling
> __read_seqcount_begin() and both using the same variable
> name. I could rename one of them  and use double-underscores
> for both, but I haven't come up with a good alternative name
> that wouldn't make it less consistent in the process.

At least x86's put_user and get_user use _pu/_gu suffixes on their local
variables, so perhaps that could be made a weak default convention?

__seq_rsb
__seq_rrsb
__seq_rrs

Hm, or perhaps not. But it's still better than triplicating each macro
to do a UNIQUE_ID dance.

Rasmus