[v4,1/4] device property: Get rid of __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_EL*SIZE*()

  First of all, _ELEMENT_SIZE() repeats existing sizeof_field() macro.
Second, usage of _ARRAY_ELSIZE_LEN() adds unnecessary indirection
to the data layout. It's more understandable when the data structure
is placed explicitly. That said, get rid of those macros by replacing
them with the existing helper and explicit data structure layout.

Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
---
v4: added tag (Heikki)
v3: fixed typo in PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF_ARRAY_LEN() impl (LKP)
v2: rebased on latest Linux Next, fixed anon union assignment
 include/linux/property.h | 34 ++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
  

On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 2:35 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> First of all, _ELEMENT_SIZE() repeats existing sizeof_field() macro.
> Second, usage of _ARRAY_ELSIZE_LEN() adds unnecessary indirection
> to the data layout. It's more understandable when the data structure
> is placed explicitly. That said, get rid of those macros by replacing
> them with the existing helper and explicit data structure layout.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> Acked-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>

The series in which this patch is included does not apply cleanly for me.

I guess it depends on the earlier material already in Greg's tree, so
I'm leaving it to Greg.

> ---
> v4: added tag (Heikki)
> v3: fixed typo in PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF_ARRAY_LEN() impl (LKP)
> v2: rebased on latest Linux Next, fixed anon union assignment
>  include/linux/property.h | 34 ++++++++++++++--------------------
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/property.h b/include/linux/property.h
> index 5d840299146d..0eab13a5c7df 100644
> --- a/include/linux/property.h
> +++ b/include/linux/property.h
> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
>
>  #include <linux/bits.h>
>  #include <linux/fwnode.h>
> +#include <linux/stddef.h>
>  #include <linux/types.h>
>
>  struct device;
> @@ -311,24 +312,14 @@ struct property_entry {
>   * crafted to avoid gcc-4.4.4's problems with initialization of anon unions
>   * and structs.
>   */
> -
> -#define __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ELEMENT_SIZE(_elem_)                          \
> -       sizeof(((struct property_entry *)NULL)->value._elem_[0])
> -
> -#define __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_ELSIZE_LEN(_name_, _elsize_, _Type_,    \
> -                                         _val_, _len_)                 \
> -(struct property_entry) {                                              \
> -       .name = _name_,                                                 \
> -       .length = (_len_) * (_elsize_),                                 \
> -       .type = DEV_PROP_##_Type_,                                      \
> -       { .pointer = _val_ },                                           \
> +#define __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, _elem_, _Type_, _val_, _len_)               \
> +(struct property_entry) {                                                              \
> +       .name = _name_,                                                                 \
> +       .length = (_len_) * sizeof_field(struct property_entry, value._elem_[0]),       \
> +       .type = DEV_PROP_##_Type_,                                                      \
> +       { .pointer = _val_ },                                                           \
>  }
>
> -#define __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, _elem_, _Type_, _val_, _len_)\
> -       __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_ELSIZE_LEN(_name_,                       \
> -                               __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ELEMENT_SIZE(_elem_),  \
> -                               _Type_, _val_, _len_)
> -
>  #define PROPERTY_ENTRY_U8_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, _val_, _len_)              \
>         __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, u8_data, U8, _val_, _len_)
>  #define PROPERTY_ENTRY_U16_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, _val_, _len_)             \
> @@ -340,9 +331,12 @@ struct property_entry {
>  #define PROPERTY_ENTRY_STRING_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, _val_, _len_)          \
>         __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, str, STRING, _val_, _len_)
>  #define PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, _val_, _len_)             \
> -       __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_ELSIZE_LEN(_name_,                       \
> -                               sizeof(struct software_node_ref_args),  \
> -                               REF, _val_, _len_)
> +(struct property_entry) {                                              \
> +       .name = _name_,                                                 \
> +       .length = (_len_) * sizeof(struct software_node_ref_args),      \
> +       .type = DEV_PROP_REF,                                           \
> +       { .pointer = _val_ },                                           \
> +}
>
>  #define PROPERTY_ENTRY_U8_ARRAY(_name_, _val_)                         \
>         PROPERTY_ENTRY_U8_ARRAY_LEN(_name_, _val_, ARRAY_SIZE(_val_))
> @@ -360,7 +354,7 @@ struct property_entry {
>  #define __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ELEMENT(_name_, _elem_, _Type_, _val_)                \
>  (struct property_entry) {                                              \
>         .name = _name_,                                                 \
> -       .length = __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ELEMENT_SIZE(_elem_),                \
> +       .length = sizeof_field(struct property_entry, value._elem_[0]), \
>         .is_inline = true,                                              \
>         .type = DEV_PROP_##_Type_,                                      \
>         { .value = { ._elem_[0] = _val_ } },                            \
> --
> 2.35.1
>
  

On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 07:55:44PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 2:35 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > First of all, _ELEMENT_SIZE() repeats existing sizeof_field() macro.
> > Second, usage of _ARRAY_ELSIZE_LEN() adds unnecessary indirection
> > to the data layout. It's more understandable when the data structure
> > is placed explicitly. That said, get rid of those macros by replacing
> > them with the existing helper and explicit data structure layout.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > Acked-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
> 
> The series in which this patch is included does not apply cleanly for me.
> 
> I guess it depends on the earlier material already in Greg's tree, so
> I'm leaving it to Greg.

Andy, did I miss this?

confused,

greg k-h
  

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 04:40:53PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 07:55:44PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 2:35 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > First of all, _ELEMENT_SIZE() repeats existing sizeof_field() macro.
> > > Second, usage of _ARRAY_ELSIZE_LEN() adds unnecessary indirection
> > > to the data layout. It's more understandable when the data structure
> > > is placed explicitly. That said, get rid of those macros by replacing
> > > them with the existing helper and explicit data structure layout.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > > Acked-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > The series in which this patch is included does not apply cleanly for me.
> > 
> > I guess it depends on the earlier material already in Greg's tree, so
> > I'm leaving it to Greg.
> 
> Andy, did I miss this?

Nope, thanks!
40eb28dc17f8 ("device property: Get rid of __PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_EL*SIZE*()")