Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230504200527.1935944-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
 <20230504200527.1935944-13-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
 <3b017a9f-220d-4da8-2cf6-7f0d6175b30c@efficios.com> <CAHk-=wjzpHjqhybyEhkTzGgTdBP3LZ1FmOw8=1MMXr=-j5OPxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3cc72a67-d648-0040-6f60-37663797e360@efficios.com> <CAHk-=wh-x1PL=UUGD__Dv6kd+kyCHjNF-TCHGG9ayLnysf-PdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <d8dfd1af-5b82-ddd8-24f5-fa9dfbb4b1fb@efficios.com>
In-Reply-To: <d8dfd1af-5b82-ddd8-24f5-fa9dfbb4b1fb@efficios.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 5 May 2023 13:22:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wg27iiFZWYmjKmULxwkXisOHuAXq=vbiazBabgh9M1rqg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 12/13] blk-mq.h: Fix parentheses around macro
 parameter use
To:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 1:08=E2=80=AFPM Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>
> The reason why I think the lvalue of a "=3D" operator can be argued to be
> "special" is because it is simply invalid to apply many of the C
> operators to an lvalue (e.g. +, -, /, ...),

Mathieu, you are simply objectively wrong.

See here:

  #define m1(x) (x =3D 2)
  #define m2(x) ((x) =3D 2)

and then try using the argument "a =3D b" to those macros.

Guess which one flags it as an error ("lvalue required") and which one does=
 not?

m2 is the only "good" one. Yes, m1 works in 99% of all cases in
practice, but if you want a safer macro, you *will* add the
parentheses.

So *STOP*ARGUING* based on an incorrect "lowest precedence" basis.
Even for the "lowest precedence" case, you have the *same* precedence.

The fact is, assignment is not in any way special operation in macros,
and does not deserve - and should absolutely not have - any special
"doesn't need parentheses around argument" rules.

           Linus