On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 09:00:41AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 04:49:47PM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > Do we not expect the number of argument to grow ? This "cleanup" would > > do away with such possibilities, and then require adding the API later, > > and this requiring a full set of collateral evolutions again when this > > is needed. What was the original motivation for using this instead of > > the approach you are suggesting ? > > We still got plenty of space for attrs. If you're worried about running > out of 32 flags we could do a dma_attrs_t typedef that we could swich > to a u64. That would have another advantage in that we could add a > __bitwise sparse annotation to avoid people passing the wrong kind of > flags. History shows only sparse use of extensions of these these attributes so I think the approach with a typedef is definitely more suitable for this API, and should last long enough. The added gain of the annotation is a nice bonus. Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
