From: "Csókás Bence" <csokas.bence@prolan.hu>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<trivial@kernel.org>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] net: include: mii: Refactor: Define LPA_* in terms of ADVERTISE_*
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 15:37:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3f9b6129-e81e-4cc1-93ff-9d4cc6ffc035@prolan.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <331930db-f5a1-4ad7-947f-7aaf5618c646@lunn.ch>
Hi!
On 6/5/24 14:51, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 02:16:47PM +0200, Csókás, Bence wrote:
>> Ethernet specification mandates that these bits will be equal.
>> To reduce the amount of magix hex'es in the code, just define
>> them in terms of each other.
>
> Are magic hexes in this context actually bad?
Yes, as if it ever needs to be changed (for instance in the 2/2 of the
series, when I replaced them with BIT() macros), it needs to be changed
twice in the file.
> In .c files i would
> agree. But what you have in effect done is force me into jump another
> hoop to find the actual hex value so i can manually decode a register
> value.
True. I expected this concern, hence why I tagged this as RFC. However,
I believe that from a maintainability perspective, it's best to only
have one definition, and since these #define's are right under one
another, the "jumping around" is minimal anyways.
> And you have made the compile slightly slower.
C'mon, that's negligible. The time it takes to load the header file from
disk will probably take longer than it does to resolve an extra layer of
simple #define's.
> These defines have been like this since the beginning of the git
> history. Is there a good reason to change them after all that time?
Just because something was "always like this" doesn't mean that it
cannot be changed. Especially since this patch is 100%
backwards-compatible, just maybe slightly more future-proof.
> Andrew
>
Bence
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-05 13:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-05 12:16 [RFC PATCH 1/2] net: include: mii: Refactor: Define LPA_* in terms of ADVERTISE_* Csókás, Bence
2024-06-05 12:16 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] net: include: mii: Refactor: Use BIT() for ADVERTISE_* bits Csókás, Bence
2024-06-05 14:13 ` Vladimir Oltean
2024-06-05 14:47 ` Csókás Bence
2024-06-05 15:31 ` Vladimir Oltean
2024-06-05 16:48 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-06-05 12:51 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] net: include: mii: Refactor: Define LPA_* in terms of ADVERTISE_* Andrew Lunn
2024-06-05 13:37 ` Csókás Bence [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3f9b6129-e81e-4cc1-93ff-9d4cc6ffc035@prolan.hu \
--to=csokas.bence@prolan.hu \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trivial@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox