From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3s3m700P8xzDqQn for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2016 05:12:43 +1000 (AEST) Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 14:11:30 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Olof Johansson Cc: Baole Ni , chuansheng.liu@intel.com, maurochehab@gmail.com, mchehab@redhat.com, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@infradead.org, egor@pasemi.com, dougthompson@xmission.com, bp@alien8.de, mchehab@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, m.chehab@samsung.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0157/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro Message-ID: <20160802191130.GG9387@gate.crashing.org> References: <20160802104515.24206-1-baolex.ni@intel.com> <20160802185447.GA5288@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20160802185447.GA5288@localhost> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:54:47AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:45:15PM +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. > > Am I the only one who find the readability to be MUCH better for the > numeric values? You are not the only one. Robustness is a non-issue here as well (except that this patch series showed that some mail servers struggle to handle 1285 emails). Segher