Re: [PATCH v2] bitops kernel-doc: inline instead of macro

[Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>]

> Hmm, can we simply do
> 
> static inline int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile unsigned long * addr)
> {
> 	return test_and_set_bit(nr, addr);
> }
> 
> please ?

Certainly.  That does look better.

---

From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>

Use duplicated inline functions for test_and_set_bit_lock() on x86
instead of #define macros, thus avoiding a bad example.  This allows
kernel-doc to run cleanly instead of terminating with an error:

Error(linux-2.6.24-rc1//include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h:188): cannot understand prototype: 'test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit '

Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
---
 include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h |    7 +++++--
 include/asm-x86/bitops_64.h |    7 +++++--
 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

--- linux-2.6.24-rc1.orig/include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc1/include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h
@@ -183,9 +183,12 @@ static inline int test_and_set_bit(int n
  * @nr: Bit to set
  * @addr: Address to count from
  *
- * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86
+ * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86.
  */
-#define test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit
+static inline int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile unsigned long * addr)
+{
+	return test_and_set_bit(nr, addr);
+}
 
 /**
  * __test_and_set_bit - Set a bit and return its old value
--- linux-2.6.24-rc1.orig/include/asm-x86/bitops_64.h
+++ linux-2.6.24-rc1/include/asm-x86/bitops_64.h
@@ -173,9 +173,12 @@ static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit(i
  * @nr: Bit to set
  * @addr: Address to count from
  *
- * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86
+ * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86.
  */
-#define test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit
+static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile void * addr)
+{
+	return test_and_set_bit(nr, addr);
+}
 
 /**
  * __test_and_set_bit - Set a bit and return its old value
-
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/