Re: [PATCH v2] Remove socket.S implementation

[Richard Henderson <rth at twiddle dot net>]

On 05/21/2015 12:56 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> +#define __SOCKETCALL0(__name) \
> +  INLINE_SYSCALL (socketcall, 2, __name)

If there really are any zero-arg socket calls, the second argument here must be
1, or you must pass a second argument (null?).

If there are no zero-arg socket calls, as I suspect, then remove this so that
someone gets a compile-time error for such a typo in the argument list.


> +#define __SOCKETCALL1(__name, __a1) \
> +  INLINE_SYSCALL (socketcall, 2, __name, \
> +     ((long int [1]) { (long int) __a1 }))

(1) you don't need __ in the macros; it just messies the text.
(2) you need parenthesis around the arguments before casting.


r~


> +#define __SOCKETCALL2(__name, __a1, __a2) \
> +  INLINE_SYSCALL (socketcall, 2, __name, \
> +     ((long int [2]) { (long int) __a1, (long int) __a2 }))
> +#define __SOCKETCALL3(__name, __a1, __a2, __a3) \
> +  INLINE_SYSCALL (socketcall, 2, __name, \
> +     ((long int [3]) { (long int) __a1, (long int) __a2, (long int) __a3 }))
> +#define __SOCKETCALL4(__name, __a1, __a2, __a3, __a4) \
> +  INLINE_SYSCALL (socketcall, 2, __name, \
> +     ((long int [4]) { (long int) __a1, (long int) __a2, (long int) __a3, \
> +                       (long int) __a4 }))
> +#define __SOCKETCALL5(__name, __a1, __a2, __a3, __a4, __a5) \
> +  INLINE_SYSCALL (socketcall, 2, __name, \
> +     ((long int [5]) { (long int) __a1, (long int) __a2, (long int) __a3, \
> +                       (long int) __a4, (long int) __a5 }))
> +#define __SOCKETCALL6(__name, __a1, __a2, __a3, __a4, __a5, __a6) \
> +  INLINE_SYSCALL (socketcall, 2, __name, \
> +     ((long int [6]) { (long int) __a1, (long int) __a2, (long int) __a3, \
> +                       (long int) __a4, (long int) __a5, (long int) __a6 }))