The get_cpu_var marcro which is defined as below
29 #define get_cpu_var(var) (*({ \\
30 extern int simple_identifier_##var(vo
What you see between the opening ({
and closing })
is a statement expression - a non-standard feature of GCC compiler, which allows one to embed compound statements into C expressions. The result of such statement expression is the very last expression statement inside the ({})
. In your case that would be &__get_cpu_var(var)
.
The &
operator is applied to the result of __get_cpu_var(var)
subexpression. That implies that __get_cpu_var
returns an lvalue. If this is indeed C, then __get_cpu_var
must also be a macro, since in C language functions cannot return lvalues.
The &
operator produces a pointer (the result of the entire statement expression), which is then dereferenced by a *
operator present at the very beginning of the above macro definition. So, the above macro is essentially equivalent to the *&__get_cpu_var(var)
expression.
Some might ask why it is implemented as *&__get_cpu_var(var)
and not just __get_cpu_var(var)
. This is done that way to preserve the lvalueness of the result of __get_cpu_var(var)
. The result of statement expression is always an rvalue, even if the last stetement inside the ({})
was an lvalue. In order to preserve the lvalueness of the result the well-known *&
trick is used.
This trick is not limited to GCC statement expressions in any way. It is relatively often used in ordinary everyday C programming. For example, imagine you have two variables
int a, b;
and you want to write an expression that would return either a
or b
as an lvalue (let's say we want to assign 42
to it) depending on the selector variable select
. A naive attempt might look as follows
(select ? a : b) = 42;
This will not work, since in C language the ?:
operator loses the lvalueness of its operands. The result is an rvalue, which cannot be assigned to. In this situation the *&
trick comes to the rescue
*(select ? &a : &b) = 42;
and now it works as intended.
This is exactly how and why the original poster's macro definition contains a seemingly redundant application of *
and &
. Because of that you can use the above get_cpu_var
macro on either side of an assgnment
something = get_cpu_var(something);
get_cpu_var(something) = something;
without that trick you'd only be able to use get_cpu_var
on the right-hand side.
In C++ language the same effect is achieved by using references. In C we have no references, so we use tricks like this instead.