[Intel-xe] [PATCH v5 1/6] drm/xe: Add XE_MISSING_CASE macro

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Rodrigo,

On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 12:03:26PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 21, 2023 at 03:55:14PM +0530, Badal Nilawar wrote:
> > Add XE_MISSING_CASE macro to handle missing switch case
> > 
> > v2: Add comment about macro usage (Himal)
> > 
> > Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti at linux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar at intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Himal Prasad Ghimiray <himal.prasad.ghimiray at intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h | 4 ++++
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h
> > index daf56c846d03..6c74c69920ed 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_macros.h
> > @@ -15,4 +15,8 @@
> >  			    "Ioctl argument check failed at %s:%d: %s", \
> >  			    __FILE__, __LINE__, #cond), 1))
> >  
> > +/* Parameter to macro should be a variable name */
> > +#define XE_MISSING_CASE(x) WARN(1, "Missing case (%s == %ld)\n", \
> > +				__stringify(x), (long)(x))
> > +
> 
> No, please! Let's not add unnecessary macros.

it's not a bad idea, actually... in i915 we have the MISSING_CASE
for switch cases with a defined number of cases and print
warnings in case none if them is the one inside the switch.

It's so widely used and actually nice to have that I thought many
times to move it to some core kernel libraries.

Andi