From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Bottomley Subject: Re: [PATCH 0082/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2016 10:42:49 -0400 Message-ID: <1470148969.2485.20.camel@HansenPartnership.com> References: <20160802103914.19225-1-baolex.ni@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:56110 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965647AbcHBOzg (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 10:55:36 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160802103914.19225-1-baolex.ni@intel.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Baole Ni , don.brace@microsemi.com, len.brown@intel.com, pavel@ucw.cz, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org Cc: iss_storagedev@hp.com, esc.storagedev@microsemi.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chuansheng.liu@intel.com On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 18:39 +0800, Baole Ni wrote: > I find that the developers often just specified the numeric value > when calling a macro which is defined with a parameter for access > permission. As we know, these numeric value for access permission > have had the corresponding macro, and that using macro can improve > the robustness and readability of the code, thus, I suggest replacing > the numeric parameter with the macro. Please stop ... can't you see that sending out over a thousand emails with a single change in each is basically spam, especially for those of us who got our INBOXes filled by virtue of being on the direct cc. You don't need the thousand emails to achieve agreement over whether we should do this, and if we decide to do it, Linus would far rather run a simple script over the kernel as it is in an -rc state. Could you please begin a discussion by posting the suggestion and the script. Thanks, James