Re: [RFC] backports: always use new version compare macros

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 12-2-2017 20:11, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Sat, 2017-02-11 at 22:45 +0100, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
>> On 7-2-2017 23:08, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>> It's some churn, but I think worthwhile - any objections?
>> I find comparison operators more clear, but it is probably just a
>> matter of getting used to it. What makes it worthwile? As you already
>> did the churn I do not have any objections. Just curious.
> So to be honest, I actually pushed the change more or less by accident,
> I'm happy to back it out again.

I suspect the churn was not in pushing the change :-p I am fine with it.
> My reasoning was something along these lines: First, I find it awkward
> to always type the long form when we always have the same patterns.
> Especially with the IN_RANGE() part, which I haven't even fully
> converted I think. So that's my immediate motivation for adding it, but
> as the de-facto maintainer now I'd also want people to really be able
> to figure out which pattern they should use, regardless of whether
> they're looking at old or new bits, so unifying it (towards the new one
> because I'm a lazy bastard) seemed like a good idea.

Agree that a mix of old and new macros is not what we want. I am lazy
too so thanks.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux