On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 03:19:38PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 09:42:38AM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > OK, can someone please tell me how this is useful for documentation > > purposes? Anybody who doesn't know that sizeof(__be32) == 4 has no > > business working on XDR code. > > I could understand this kind of patch if you were converting to > > sizeof(<variable name>), as that documents exactly which variable you > > are going to encode in this buffer and so is better than a naked > > value, but how is sizeof(__be32) any more useful documentation than > > "4"? > > I think this was in reply to my complaints about the very magic length > reserved. I think arithmetic expressions in the form of 4 + 4 + 8 etc > are fine too, although the sizeof expressions seem to be even more > obvious and thus preferable to me. The main problem is something like: > > > p = xdr_reserve_space(xdr, 20); > > hidden deep down in a routine which requires you to count over > all kinds of statements working with the XDR stream. OK. So maybe a better approach would be individual patches for confusing spots as we come across them. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
