[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140225214748.GA21559@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 22:47:48 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>
Cc: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, mjg59@...f.ucam.org,
jkosina@...e.cz, greg@...ah.com, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com, hpa@...or.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] kexec: A new system call, kexec_file_load, for in
kernel kexec
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 08:35:19PM +0100, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> #define BIT(nr) (1UL << (nr))
>
> For my part I'm not convinced it's a better way to do it, unless
> Borislav also wanted to suggest adding an enum for the bit number
> values...
Well,
#define KEXEC_FILE_UNLOAD BIT(1)
is much more readable.
The enum thing is also nice to have but it's not my personal preference.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists