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;
Date:   Tue, 06 Jun 2023 20:04:39 +0530
From:   Siddh Raman Pant <code@siddh.me>
To:     "Laurent Pinchart" <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Cc:     "Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
        "Maxime Ripard" <mripard@kernel.org>,
        "Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@suse.de>,
        "David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
        "Daniel Vetter" <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        "Andrzej Hajda" <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>,
        "Neil Armstrong" <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>,
        "Robert Foss" <rfoss@kernel.org>,
        "Jonas Karlman" <jonas@kwiboo.se>,
        "Jernej Skrabec" <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
        "Jani Nikula" <jani.nikula@linux.intel.com>,
        "dri-devel" <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        "linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Suraj Upadhyay" <usuraj35@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <18891219d8e.6a7d8f15119986.32609419593331086@siddh.me>
In-Reply-To: <20230606140512.GA5197@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
References: <cover.1686047727.git.code@siddh.me>
 <ae42791195a788bb77b3f9c2b87bca5d4e78cf83.1686047727.git.code@siddh.me> <20230606140512.GA5197@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/8] drm/print: Fix and add support for NULL as first
 argument in drm_* macros
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Medium
User-Agent: Zoho Mail
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 06 Jun 2023 19:35:12 +0530, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Siddh,
> 
> Thank you for the patch.

Anytime :)

> On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 04:15:16PM +0530, Siddh Raman Pant wrote:
> > Comments say macros DRM_DEBUG_* are deprecated in favor of
> > drm_dbg_*(NULL, ...), but they have broken support for it,
> > as the macro will result in `(NULL) ? (NULL)->dev : NULL`.
> 
> What's the problem there ?

(NULL)->dev is invalid C. It's a macro, so preprocessor substitutes
that text directly, there is no evaluation. GCC will throw an error
regarding dereferencing a void* pointer.

> >  /* Helper for struct drm_device based logging. */
> >  #define __drm_printk(drm, level, type, fmt, ...)                     \
> > -     dev_##level##type((drm)->dev, "[drm] " fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > +({                                                                   \
> > +     struct device *__dev_ = __drm_dev_ptr(drm);                     \
> > +     if (__dev_)                                                     \
> > +             dev_##level##type(__dev_, "[drm] " fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
> > +     else                                                            \
> > +             pr_##level##type("[drm] " fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__);          \
> 
> If I recall correctly, dev_*() handle a NULL dev pointer just fine. Do
> we need to manually fall back to pr_*() ?

I took drm_dev_printk (on line 261 of drm_print.c) as the reference,
wherein it uses a conditional for determining whether dev_printk or
printk should be called.

I suppose it is to avoid printing "(NULL device *)", which dev_printk
does if it gets a NULL device pointer (refer the definition on line
4831 of drivers/base/core.c). Though if I'm wrong, kindly let me know.

Thanks,
Siddh