From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-x243.google.com (mail-qt0-x243.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3v2n6b4y14zDqPn for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 21:54:31 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-qt0-x243.google.com with SMTP id l7so20605679qtd.3 for ; Tue, 17 Jan 2017 02:54:31 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20170112035413.26544-1-ruscur@russell.cc> <1484293883.2406.1.camel@gmail.com> <87a8aqau99.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> From: "Oliver O'Halloran" Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 21:54:29 +1100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Use octal numbers for file permissions To: Michael Ellerman Cc: Russell Currey , Cyril Bur , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c065da6dcb81d0546481fd9 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --94eb2c065da6dcb81d0546481fd9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 It has been pointed out that this actually occured in 2017. My apologies. On 17/01/2017 9:50 PM, "Oliver O'Halloran" wrote: > "It's possible I missed one, but I did genuinely review all of it" > > Cyril Bur, 2016 > In a hobart pub, specifically The Winston > > On 17/01/2017 8:53 PM, "Michael Ellerman" wrote: > >> Cyril Bur writes: >> >> > On Thu, 2017-01-12 at 14:54 +1100, Russell Currey wrote: >> >> Symbolic macros are unintuitive and hard to read, whereas octal >> constants >> >> are much easier to interpret. Replace macros for the basic permission >> >> flags (user/group/other read/write/execute) with numeric constants >> >> instead, across the whole powerpc tree. >> >> >> >> Introducing a significant number of changes across the tree for no >> runtime >> >> benefit isn't exactly desirable, but so long as these macros are still >> >> used in the tree people will keep sending patches that add them. Not >> only >> >> are they hard to parse at a glance, there are multiple ways of coming >> to >> >> the same value (as you can see with 0444 and 0644 in this patch) which >> >> hurts readability. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Russell Currey >> > >> > Reviewed-by: Cyril Bur >> >> Did you really really review every single change? >> >> Because if you did then I don't have to, and that would be *great* :) >> >> cheers >> > --94eb2c065da6dcb81d0546481fd9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It has been pointed out that this actually occured in 2017. = My apologies.


On 17/01/2017 9:5= 0 PM, "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@gmail.com> wrote:

"It's possible I missed one, but I= did genuinely review all of it"

Cyril Bur, 2016
In a hobart pub, specifically The Winston


On 17/01/2017 8:5= 3 PM, "Michael Ellerman" <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
Cyril Bur <cyrilbur@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 2017-01-12 at 14:54 +1100, Russell Currey wrote:
>> Symbolic macros are unintuitive and hard to read, whereas octal co= nstants
>> are much easier to interpret.=C2=A0 Replace macros for the basic p= ermission
>> flags (user/group/other read/write/execute) with numeric constants=
>> instead, across the whole powerpc tree.
>>
>> Introducing a significant number of changes across the tree for no= runtime
>> benefit isn't exactly desirable, but so long as these macros a= re still
>> used in the tree people will keep sending patches that add them.= =C2=A0 Not only
>> are they hard to parse at a glance, there are multiple ways of com= ing to
>> the same value (as you can see with 0444 and 0644 in this patch) w= hich
>> hurts readability.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Russell Currey <ruscur@russell.cc>
>
> Reviewed-by: Cyril Bur <cyrilbur@gmail.com>

Did you really really review every single change?

Because if you did then I don't have to, and that would be *great* :)
cheers
--94eb2c065da6dcb81d0546481fd9--