From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A102BC433F5 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:50:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BF2A610A0 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:50:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240505AbhITOvh (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:51:37 -0400 Received: from mail-ua1-f41.google.com ([209.85.222.41]:37749 "EHLO mail-ua1-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232166AbhITOve (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:51:34 -0400 Received: by mail-ua1-f41.google.com with SMTP id p9so11326719uak.4; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 07:50:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=wH5UncPKe50JwP+zJde5g0e4HDP42GQioU45RB2YIEY=; b=4UKmu6AistRf++1IPMRgOgzZskSFqf7gHDAgRf3kxj7kTqWDAhcpo2Y8dHTRWn+97m BI39sH8eZT7w5stK1FCopvahuJ02kET+7en5UXBt2TSQXfEvoplHmmcdGsHiU2UFyr1j PsypvNmbOUJfwgUwvS+1tT1+IC5meUVdMcaKydN9Fe9SvNF9KQCnoCjKgOmr1vPqbliN dQ35r4pv0th/0fM7d5UmEqV4peogs/6Emnr70qUiCqcPH9W3CHoh13ERy9aFR2swF9LN w+Z9JYQHCIiglebSg+pWAerXMMxGlfmJKu2XdDNK4LMQIJ4lwrMMT47LXx9TXdcIVn0I X6cg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531B7EmoQ7qE9Rp95qNh5SuIIdLr/YY/yDBfB5YVc8ftdjUWpszZ U3xRmTSD6vqdiRZ3l3fbQ9RiLPLXSBEvEhMFY+4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyAkutJYCRne96YNrucgTgxe0OCzkFVzHSFb01yXQCKWuDFgnS6KokRadVNtz5w9JNPAKYiBzoi+eDjy3akNww= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:35aa:: with SMTP id t39mr11940672uad.89.1632149406719; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 07:50:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210920140509.5177-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20210920140509.5177-3-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20210920140938.GA24424@lst.de> <20210920143046.GA26163@lst.de> In-Reply-To: From: Geert Uytterhoeven Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 16:49:55 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] configfs: use BIT() for internal flags To: Bartosz Golaszewski Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Joel Becker , Shuah Khan , Linus Walleij , Andy Shevchenko , =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= , Kent Gibson , Jonathan Corbet , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Al Viro , Jack Winch , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "open list:DOCUMENTATION" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org Hi Bartosz, On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:47 PM Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:30 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 04:29:30PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:09 PM Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 04:05:03PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > > > For better readability and maintenance: use the BIT() macro for flag > > > > > definitions. > > > > > > > > NAK. BIT() is the stupidest macro in the kernel and shall not be used > > > > ever. And I'm pretty sure we had this discussion a few times. > > > > > > Care to explain why it is a stupid macro? > > > > Please look at the previous thread. I'm tired of this discussion. > > The only previous answer from Christoph is this: > https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg2399968.html Yep, found that one, too. Now, as these definitions do not correspond to hardware register bits, perhaps use an enum? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds