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=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 2B95FC43382 for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 14:00:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D1C21528 for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 14:00:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="CiF1v2wr" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E3D1C21528 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729183AbeI1UYp (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:24:45 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com ([209.85.166.65]:45344 "EHLO mail-io1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728889AbeI1UYo (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:24:44 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id e12-v6so4197333iok.12 for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 07:00:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=V1YUbtd6aFkUt0FR+y+/NkKwWjXB81Dzm7EN1IuEOTI=; b=CiF1v2wrKW0n7Eg7L1ZBJru3KvAEvaqXx01nDeXKMkrteOWJCms6c5zm8G+GVKpk78 eLbuJY6jSGI+5Oh38A5gQe4SKeR3s/KJG/3IB5QqbZ/6pt5z0SA/LnP9F4cWag2lpgwj 089qlMPO5Ko2g3MPXiSD0DlpVtK9W54yV1Ir4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=V1YUbtd6aFkUt0FR+y+/NkKwWjXB81Dzm7EN1IuEOTI=; b=MNPywPl3eq9h3AxEsKeJcx1SwLpJDamTjLGzvP0mKrqsC6tg1QiyLa+LxPhILz1r8u Jxv2yfOQjYa/OkPO5Zzyr/pQd5hZqXnnEISKNy8n+UR5ae/ddvN5fYpVOje6FmiCl2EX taRgPrn4FzOiEtYajJXQO9oY36RVBeDrjd31IiuQQXvyA/wed6UsKFvGm1W7I5mkZMkb l+Xc9FyrDnvi1VQFeZT5k6jW8o899hoBkiSURChMbXLqErLSqJmy0+9fff131iIRYW4T COK/lwx1gfbHoax/RBsfg4rssPTjV/NQj8GRLV8YirFLZ1gbQhEqDSyir5/pXWfiLAjx RMYA== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfojdRS3ObB55dUbtENd+5omPMCcoa1y08StJxdxbySYD0j9W5zJy rOHia76vhH1XRq+dqOogh5wKUF6nAL3EmfDjh01e2A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62fzNYMaylOTr5XuIo2zEb6yxOOqqldKGY6JOeowfpVVVdSjF2g+H10o7nVRPEXAYtzsAAqMjF/q/vbGppjuGs= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:be83:: with SMTP id o125-v6mr11856981iof.173.1538143248302; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 07:00:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a6b:2848:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 07:00:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20180925145622.29959-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <20180925145622.29959-2-Jason@zx2c4.com> From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:00:47 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 01/23] asm: simd context helper API To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Cc: Joe Perches , LKML , Netdev , Linux Crypto Mailing List , David Miller , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Samuel Neves , Andrew Lutomirski , Thomas Gleixner , linux-arch Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 28 September 2018 at 15:59, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:58 PM Ard Biesheuvel > wrote: >> >> On 28 September 2018 at 15:47, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:49 AM Ard Biesheuvel >> > wrote: >> >> >> +typedef enum { >> >> >> + HAVE_NO_SIMD = 1 << 0, >> >> >> + HAVE_FULL_SIMD = 1 << 1, >> >> >> + HAVE_SIMD_IN_USE = 1 << 31 >> >> >> +} simd_context_t; >> >> >> + >> >> >> >> Oh, and another thing (and I'm surprised checkpatch.pl didn't complain >> >> about it): the use of typedef in new code is strongly discouraged. >> >> This policy predates my involvement, so perhaps Joe can elaborate on >> >> the rationale? >> > >> > In case it matters, the motivation for making this a typedef is I >> > could imagine this at some point turning into a more complicated >> > struct on certain platforms and that would make refactoring easier. I >> > could just make it `struct simd_context` now with 1 member though... >> >> Yes that makes sense > > The rationale for it being a typedef or moving to a struct now? Yes just switch to a struct.