From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 009.lax.mailroute.net (009.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BBB45223; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:53:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736963626; cv=none; b=AVnS0wI8oZ/Z7ZvgWT4S0svZveUg0UwJO+eO0MiDaWrsqUrbdwBcy3x0Beb4YB2/q1XUv2SG4PpgDwhEma6+gO83dKelHkv9M9tHp1nETsHfVk5SUQOl1iWpRZRhkkXsl7W/7xbOP4Q3atgEshjU3Dx5S0Qzg3K9k5N5NE3+rrA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736963626; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KnvMDcCnWCybnStfvY1jJiCVNzq0woBniXPNPwuLqos=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=Y2AAx9YeYxbNVWuFA5qJhXSZb7+Vrg0cxudcMCRfK9J4TQW7v9kq3seCIAmHuxbBS3tbXCr62XSEQRAL2XmEwzasI/MAsvA9vnrmJNtvR/2VAOLGOw8Gdrqwngt5Qoco/CPaf1vr5p0ByIehAkDP0dQQVFRBTICBaLcM7kIm1BA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=Ng1loLEu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="Ng1loLEu" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 009.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4YYDBc2k4gzlgMVW; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:53:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:content-language:references:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1736963619; x=1739555620; bh=is/Az9xGToTsuvQhxSyLFLcX vYqhkADF/5ojbpYHtBU=; b=Ng1loLEuc/xiqIXDqAxKT0RhMLuNdkB/9Ztk1mYg n0Izfs2wFJeOI8t6HeumaGvHR/ZMQ57s34/kmp5CKve9jiZp7LxOGsqpgxBeAhDc gXuzQ1VptPRYXKa7lq52Du9YpK6NchNqwhDtNWkSiUqJb0L2jPYugDgXrHXczv1z KDrO4ji9MW/EE86h8Ak0ao3rSqvuiQ1XOTqcTPrXCeGWzqCELR0he/gxxjZLvVft AHK/62cFZEUlRWvl/XjzCki6DA5xIwSl5vsxvV+Zfv7DENIOUaBrpfGqAMIaqZ87 9vKHr2cJ9RSbkMewHkPgVzOYKtVxHNQTE1Ha5y9hyLALPw== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 009.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (009.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id 0lmg9n-RFN6D; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:53:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [100.66.154.22] (unknown [104.135.204.82]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 009.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4YYDBR19J1zlgT1M; Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:53:34 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 09:53:33 -0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] ufs: Use str_enable_disable-like helpers To: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Alim Akhtar , Avri Altman , "James E.J. Bottomley" , "Martin K. Petersen" , Peter Wang , Stanley Jhu , Matthias Brugger , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <20250114200716.969457-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <20250114200716.969457-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 1/14/25 12:07 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > 2. Is slightly shorter thus also easier to read. Does this change really make code easier to read? It forces readers of the code to look up a function definition. Isn't there a general preference in the Linux kernel to inline function definitions if the function body is shorter than or close to the length of the function name? I'm referring to functions like this one: static inline const char *str_up_down(bool v) { return v ? "up" : "down"; } Bart.