drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h | 12 ++++++++---- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
if CONFIG_DRM_USE_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is set,
'drm_dbg' function is replaced with '__dynamic_func_call_cls',
which is replaced with a do while statement.
so in the previous code, there are the following build errors.
include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:221:58: error: expected expression before ‘do’
221 | #define __dynamic_func_call_cls(id, cls, fmt, func, ...) do { \
| ^~
include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:248:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘__dynamic_func_call_cls’
248 | __dynamic_func_call_cls(__UNIQUE_ID(ddebug), cls, fmt, func, ##__VA_ARGS__)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/drm/drm_print.h:425:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘_dynamic_func_call_cls’
425 | _dynamic_func_call_cls(cat, fmt, __drm_dev_dbg, \
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/drm/drm_print.h:504:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dev_dbg’
504 | drm_dev_dbg((drm) ? (drm)->dev : NULL, DRM_UT_DRIVER, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~
include/drm/drm_print.h:522:33: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dbg_driver’
522 | #define drm_dbg(drm, fmt, ...) drm_dbg_driver(drm, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h:14:21: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dbg’
14 | ((cond) && (drm_dbg(&(xe)->drm, \
| ^~~~~~~
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c:2029:13: note: in expansion of macro ‘XE_IOCTL_DBG’
2029 | if (XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, !gem_obj))
the problem is that,
XE_IOCTL_DBG uses this function for conditional expr.
so I fix the expr to be compatible with the do while statement,
by referring to "https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Exprs.html".
v2: I modified this to print when only cond is true.
v3: Modify to evaluate cond only once.
v4: There was a mistake in v3, send this again.
Signed-off-by: Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@gmail.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h | 12 ++++++++----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h
index daf56c846d03..51ac8faa8975 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h
@@ -10,9 +10,13 @@
#define XE_WARN_ON WARN_ON
-#define XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, cond) \
- ((cond) && (drm_dbg(&(xe)->drm, \
- "Ioctl argument check failed at %s:%d: %s", \
- __FILE__, __LINE__, #cond), 1))
+#define XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, cond) ({ \
+ int cond__ = !!(cond); \
+ if (cond__) \
+ drm_dbg(&(xe)->drm, \
+ "Ioctl argument check failed at %s:%d: %s", \
+ __FILE__, __LINE__, #cond); \
+ cond__; \
+})
#endif
--
2.34.1
On Sat, Nov 02, 2024 at 11:22:03AM +0900, Gyeyoung Baek wrote: >if CONFIG_DRM_USE_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is set, >'drm_dbg' function is replaced with '__dynamic_func_call_cls', >which is replaced with a do while statement. >so in the previous code, there are the following build errors. > >include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:221:58: error: expected expression before ‘do’ > 221 | #define __dynamic_func_call_cls(id, cls, fmt, func, ...) do { \ > | ^~ >include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:248:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘__dynamic_func_call_cls’ > 248 | __dynamic_func_call_cls(__UNIQUE_ID(ddebug), cls, fmt, func, ##__VA_ARGS__) > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >include/drm/drm_print.h:425:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘_dynamic_func_call_cls’ > 425 | _dynamic_func_call_cls(cat, fmt, __drm_dev_dbg, \ > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >include/drm/drm_print.h:504:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dev_dbg’ > 504 | drm_dev_dbg((drm) ? (drm)->dev : NULL, DRM_UT_DRIVER, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) > | ^~~~~~~~~~~ >include/drm/drm_print.h:522:33: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dbg_driver’ > 522 | #define drm_dbg(drm, fmt, ...) drm_dbg_driver(drm, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h:14:21: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dbg’ > 14 | ((cond) && (drm_dbg(&(xe)->drm, \ > | ^~~~~~~ >drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c:2029:13: note: in expansion of macro ‘XE_IOCTL_DBG’ > 2029 | if (XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, !gem_obj)) > >the problem is that, >XE_IOCTL_DBG uses this function for conditional expr. > >so I fix the expr to be compatible with the do while statement, >by referring to "https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Exprs.html". > >v2: I modified this to print when only cond is true. >v3: Modify to evaluate cond only once. >v4: There was a mistake in v3, send this again. > >Signed-off-by: Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> I will apply this to drm-xe-next once we have CI back. thanks Lucas De Marchi
On Mon, Nov 04, 2024 at 12:04:30PM -0600, Lucas De Marchi wrote: >On Sat, Nov 02, 2024 at 11:22:03AM +0900, Gyeyoung Baek wrote: >>if CONFIG_DRM_USE_DYNAMIC_DEBUG is set, >>'drm_dbg' function is replaced with '__dynamic_func_call_cls', >>which is replaced with a do while statement. >>so in the previous code, there are the following build errors. >> >>include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:221:58: error: expected expression before ‘do’ >> 221 | #define __dynamic_func_call_cls(id, cls, fmt, func, ...) do { \ >> | ^~ >>include/linux/dynamic_debug.h:248:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘__dynamic_func_call_cls’ >> 248 | __dynamic_func_call_cls(__UNIQUE_ID(ddebug), cls, fmt, func, ##__VA_ARGS__) >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>include/drm/drm_print.h:425:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘_dynamic_func_call_cls’ >> 425 | _dynamic_func_call_cls(cat, fmt, __drm_dev_dbg, \ >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>include/drm/drm_print.h:504:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dev_dbg’ >> 504 | drm_dev_dbg((drm) ? (drm)->dev : NULL, DRM_UT_DRIVER, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~ >>include/drm/drm_print.h:522:33: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dbg_driver’ >> 522 | #define drm_dbg(drm, fmt, ...) drm_dbg_driver(drm, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h:14:21: note: in expansion of macro ‘drm_dbg’ >> 14 | ((cond) && (drm_dbg(&(xe)->drm, \ >> | ^~~~~~~ >>drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_bo.c:2029:13: note: in expansion of macro ‘XE_IOCTL_DBG’ >>2029 | if (XE_IOCTL_DBG(xe, !gem_obj)) >> >>the problem is that, >>XE_IOCTL_DBG uses this function for conditional expr. >> >>so I fix the expr to be compatible with the do while statement, >>by referring to "https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Exprs.html". >> >>v2: I modified this to print when only cond is true. >>v3: Modify to evaluate cond only once. >>v4: There was a mistake in v3, send this again. >> >>Signed-off-by: Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@gmail.com> > > >Reviewed-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@intel.com> > >I will apply this to drm-xe-next once we have CI back. there were some checkpatch issues about mixing tabs and spaces. Next time please double check the checkpatch output. I also reworded the commit message a little bit to follow an imperative mood as outlined at https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/process/submitting-patches.html#describe-your-changes Applied to drm-xe-next. Thanks. Lucas De Marchi > >thanks >Lucas De Marchi
> there were some checkpatch issues about mixing tabs and spaces. Next > time please double check the checkpatch output. I also reworded the > commit message a little bit to follow an imperative mood as outlined at > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/process/submitting-patches.html#describe-your-changes I'm sorry for not being more careful, I'll use a script next time instead of doing it manually. Thanks, Gyeyoung Baek > > Applied to drm-xe-next. Thanks. > > Lucas De Marchi > > > > >thanks > >Lucas De Marchi
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.