Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Xen/atomic: use static inlines instead of macros

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 24/02/14 10:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 21.02.14 at 21:41, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> This is some coverity-inspired tidying.
>>
>> Coverity has some grief analysing the call sites of atomic_read().  This is
>> believed to be a bug in Coverity itself when expanding the nested macros, 
>> but
>> there is no legitimate reason for it to be a macro in the first place.
>>
>> This patch changes {,_}atomic_{read,set}() from being macros to being static
>> inline functions, thus gaining some type safety.
>>
>> One issue which is not immediatly obvious is that the non-atomic varients 
>> take
>> their atomic_t at a different level of indirection to the atomic varients.
>>
>> This is not suitable for _atomic_set() (when used to initialise an atomic_t)
>> which is converted to take its parameter as a pointer.  One callsite of
>> _atomic_set() is updated, while the other two callsites are updated to
>> ATOMIC_INIT().
> Did you consider leaving these "non-atomic atomic ops" untouched
> (as they don't involve macro nesting), altering only the "real" ones?
>
> Jan
>

Yes, but for the sake of three updates at callsites, I felt the benefits
outweighed the costs.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel