On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 07:53:57PM +0530, Shreyansh Chouhan wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 04:05:32PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 07:18:38PM +0530, Shreyansh Chouhan wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 03:36:25PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 07:00:39PM +0530, Shreyansh Chouhan wrote:
The gb_loopback_stats_attrs macro, (defined in loopback.c,) is a multiline macro whose statements were not enclosed in a do while loop.
This patch adds a do while loop around the statements of the said macro.
Signed-off-by: Shreyansh Chouhan chouhan.shreyansh630@gmail.com
drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c | 10 ++++++---- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c index 2471448ba42a..c88ef3e894fa 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c +++ b/drivers/staging/greybus/loopback.c @@ -162,10 +162,12 @@ static ssize_t name##_avg_show(struct device *dev, \ } \ static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(name##_avg) -#define gb_loopback_stats_attrs(field) \
- gb_loopback_ro_stats_attr(field, min, u); \
- gb_loopback_ro_stats_attr(field, max, u); \
- gb_loopback_ro_avg_attr(field)
+#define gb_loopback_stats_attrs(field) \
- do { \
gb_loopback_ro_stats_attr(field, min, u); \gb_loopback_ro_stats_attr(field, max, u); \gb_loopback_ro_avg_attr(field); \- } while (0)
#define gb_loopback_attr(field, type) \ static ssize_t field##_show(struct device *dev, \ -- 2.31.1
Did you test build this change?
I built the module using make -C . M=drivers/staging/greybus to test build it. I didn't get any errors.
Really? Can you provide the full build output for this file with your change? I don't think you really built this file for the obvious reasons...
I ran make -C . M=drivers/staging/greybus
I got a three line output saying: make: Entering directory '/work/linux' MODPOST drivers/staging/greybus//Module.symvers make: Leaving directory '/work/linux'
I just tried rebuilding the kernel with CONFIG_GREYBUS=m, and now I can see what you are talking about. Why weren't these errors reported when I ran the previous make command? Does that too check for the config variables even when I specifically asked it to build a module?
You were just asking it to build a subdirectory, not a specific individual file, and when you do that it looks at the configuration settings.
It's always good to ensure that you actually build the files you modify before sending patches out.
thanks,
greg k-h
-
Greg KH