All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
	Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
	ath11k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath11k: Remove unnecessary enum scan_priority
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:19:30 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877e2r4g71.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdk3EPurHLMf81VHowauRYZ4FZXxNg98hJvp8CLgu=SSPw@mail.gmail.com> (Nick Desaulniers's message of "Thu, 19 Dec 2019 09:06:37 -0800")

Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> writes:

> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 5:32 AM Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>
>> Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:23 AM Nathan Chancellor
>> > <natechancellor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> wmi_scan_priority and scan_priority have the same values but the wmi one
>> >> has WMI prefixed to the names. Since that enum is already being used,
>> >> get rid of scan_priority and switch its one use to wmi_scan_priority to
>> >> fix this warning.
>> >>
>> > Also, I don't know if the more concisely named enum is preferable?
>>
>> I didn't get this comment.
>
> Given two enums with the same values:
> enum scan_priority
> enum wmi_scan_priority
> wouldn't you prefer to type wmi_ a few times less?  Doesn't really
> matter, but that was the point I was making.

Ah, now I got it :) This enum is part of firmware interface (WMI) so
yes, I prefer to use the wmi_ prefix to make that obvious.

-- 
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

_______________________________________________
ath11k mailing list
ath11k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath11k

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
	Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
	ath11k@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ath11k: Remove unnecessary enum scan_priority
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:19:30 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877e2r4g71.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdk3EPurHLMf81VHowauRYZ4FZXxNg98hJvp8CLgu=SSPw@mail.gmail.com> (Nick Desaulniers's message of "Thu, 19 Dec 2019 09:06:37 -0800")

Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> writes:

> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 5:32 AM Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>
>> Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:23 AM Nathan Chancellor
>> > <natechancellor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> wmi_scan_priority and scan_priority have the same values but the wmi one
>> >> has WMI prefixed to the names. Since that enum is already being used,
>> >> get rid of scan_priority and switch its one use to wmi_scan_priority to
>> >> fix this warning.
>> >>
>> > Also, I don't know if the more concisely named enum is preferable?
>>
>> I didn't get this comment.
>
> Given two enums with the same values:
> enum scan_priority
> enum wmi_scan_priority
> wouldn't you prefer to type wmi_ a few times less?  Doesn't really
> matter, but that was the point I was making.

Ah, now I got it :) This enum is part of firmware interface (WMI) so
yes, I prefer to use the wmi_ prefix to make that obvious.

-- 
https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

  reply	other threads:[~2019-12-20  7:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-11 19:22 [PATCH] ath11k: Remove unnecessary enum scan_priority Nathan Chancellor
2019-12-11 19:22 ` Nathan Chancellor
2019-12-12 19:34 ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-12-12 19:34   ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-12-19 13:31   ` Kalle Valo
2019-12-19 13:31     ` Kalle Valo
2019-12-19 17:06     ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-12-19 17:06       ` Nick Desaulniers
2019-12-20  7:19       ` Kalle Valo [this message]
2019-12-20  7:19         ` Kalle Valo
2019-12-18 17:51 ` Kalle Valo
2019-12-18 17:51 ` Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=877e2r4g71.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com \
    --to=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=ath11k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=natechancellor@gmail.com \
    --cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.