Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754007Ab2BQTGM (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:06:12 -0500 Received: from mail.vyatta.com ([76.74.103.46]:52779 "EHLO mail.vyatta.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752824Ab2BQTGK (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Feb 2012 14:06:10 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 11:06:02 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger To: Joe Perches Cc: Luis Felipe Strano Moraes , linville@tuxdriver.com, johannes@sipsolutions.net, davem@davemloft.net, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Cleaning up code formatting errors in net/wireless pointed out by checkpatch. Message-ID: <20120217110602.2c4e762a@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> In-Reply-To: <1329504344.584.18.camel@joe2Laptop> References: <1329492603-3972-1-git-send-email-lfelipe@profusion.mobi> <1329504344.584.18.camel@joe2Laptop> Organization: Vyatta X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.9; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1565 Lines: 47 On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:45:44 -0800 Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 07:30 -0800, Luis Felipe Strano Moraes wrote: > > These are mostly minor changes and they are being sent as one patch only in > > order to cause the smallest amount of disruption. > [] > > diff --git a/net/wireless/core.c b/net/wireless/core.c > [] > > @@ -668,7 +668,7 @@ void wiphy_unregister(struct wiphy *wiphy) > > mutex_lock(&rdev->devlist_mtx); > > __count = rdev->opencount; > > mutex_unlock(&rdev->devlist_mtx); > > - __count == 0;})); > > + __count == 0; })); > > Inline statement expressions are pretty unusual > for kernel sources. Normally these are used via > macro. > > I'd try to make the statement expression visually > distinct. Something like: > > wait_event(rdev->dev_wait, > ({ > int __count; > mutex_lock(&rdev->devlist_mtx); > __count = rdev->opencount; > mutex_unlock(&rdev->devlist_mtx); > __count == 0; > }) > ); > I prefer to see this done as an inline function wait_event(rdev->dev_wait, is_foo_ready(rdev)) Also, in this case wrapping a condition with a mutex really is meaningless because the state is longer protected out side the protected region; in other words the mutex here is bogus and provides no additional protection. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/