From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2499AC64E7B for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 11:23:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79FDB206F9 for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 11:23:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727866AbgLALW6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2020 06:22:58 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:49267 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726689AbgLALW6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2020 06:22:58 -0500 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 3DF2B68AFE; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 12:22:16 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 12:22:15 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Bartosz Golaszewski Cc: Joel Becker , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bartosz Golaszewski Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] configfs: use BIT() for internal flags Message-ID: <20201201112215.GA31985@lst.de> References: <20201130164704.22991-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20201130164704.22991-3-brgl@bgdev.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201130164704.22991-3-brgl@bgdev.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:47:02PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > From: Bartosz Golaszewski > > For better readability and maintenance: use the BIT() macro for flag > definitions. This does not improve readability, as I now need to look up a macro, one that doesn't make any sense at all. If you really prefer bit based numbering just use the totally obvious (1 << bit) syntax.