> On 6 Feb 2023, at 14:51, Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalod...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Luca > > On 2/6/23 16:42, Luca Fancellu wrote: >>> On 3 Feb 2023, at 19:09, Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalod...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Macro dt_irq() is broken because the macro parameter has the same name with >>> the struct dt_irq member "irq". >> I’m not sure about the wording “broken”, it should work anyway or am I wrong? > > No, it won't work because the structure member will be substituted as well by > the macro argument (for instance dt_irq(blah) will be replaced by > (blah)->blah).
Yes you are right, I was reading it in the wrong way! > >>> Macro dt_irq_flags() is broken as well because struct dt_irq has no member >>> named "flags". >> Yes this depends if the macro was meant to access the structure dt_irq, I’ve >> had a look >> on the commit introducing it but I could not figure out the usage. > > Given the macro name, I assumed that it was meant to be used for accessing a > dt_irq field. Yes I would come to the same conclusion
