From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH] block drivers/block: Use octal not symbolic permissions To: Joe Perches , "Ed L. Cashin" , Philipp Reisner , Lars Ellenberg , Jiri Kosina , Josef Bacik , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Ilya Dryomov , Sage Weil , Alex Elder , Philip Kelleher , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Jason Wang , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= , Boris Ostrovsky , Juergen Gross Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, nbd@other.debian.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org References: <5e97a292c1ba38a6b5a0caa271d85dc3de1b2aa7.1527105857.git.joe@perches.com> <6bf44255-145f-bf14-e254-860731ff9296@kernel.dk> <56ee8810463b6c537ca0c10c9f82e6d922acd1f1.camel@perches.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: <539cc400-28d7-66df-eb24-77fe95d617a2@kernel.dk> Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 06:47:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56ee8810463b6c537ca0c10c9f82e6d922acd1f1.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 List-ID: On 5/23/18 4:35 PM, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2018-05-23 at 15:27 -0600, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 5/23/18 2:05 PM, Joe Perches wrote: >>> Convert the S_ symbolic permissions to their octal equivalents as >>> using octal and not symbolic permissions is preferred by many as more >>> readable. >>> >>> see: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/2/1945 >>> >>> Done with automated conversion via: >>> $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -f --types=SYMBOLIC_PERMS --fix-inplace >>> >>> Miscellanea: >>> >>> o Wrapped modified multi-line calls to a single line where appropriate >>> o Realign modified multi-line calls to open parenthesis >> >> Honestly, I see this as pretty needless churn. > > btw: > > There is currently a mixture of symbolic and octal > permissions uses in block and drivers/block > > ie: 94 octal and 146 symbolic uses. > > If this is applied, all would become octal. That does help justify the change. My main worry here is creating unnecessary conflicts, which is always annoying. But it's even more annoying when the change creating the conflict isn't really that important at all. Case in point, the patch doesn't apply to the for-4.18/block branch that it should go into... -- Jens Axboe