linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] virtio-blk: make the queue depth configurable

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1395250293.8649.51.camel@joe-AO722>
Date:	Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:31:33 -0700
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	Linux Kernel Developers List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, fes@...gle.com,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio-blk: make the queue depth configurable

Couple more bikesheddy things:

Is there ever a reason to use a non __builtin_const_p(perms)?

Maybe that should be a BUILD_BUG_ON too
	BUILD_BUG_ON(!builtin_const_p_perms)

My brain of little size gets confused by the
	BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(foo) +
vs
	BUILD_BUG_ON(foo);
as it just seems like more text for the same content.

Is there any value on the "_ZERO(foo) +" I don't understand?


--
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/