linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] staging: panel: change struct bits to a bit array

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: <20150316092531.GI10964@mwanda>
Date:	Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:25:31 +0300
From:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:	Isaac Lleida <illeida@...naliasbox.org>
Cc:	willy@...a-x.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	armand.bastien@...oste.net, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, marius.gorski@...il.com,
	domdevlin@...e.fr, kernel-janitors-owner@...r.kernel.org,
	sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] staging: panel: change struct bits to a bit array

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 10:03:56AM +0100, Isaac Lleida wrote:
> This path implements a bit array representing the LCD signal states instead of the old "struct bits", which used char to represent a single bit. This will reduce the memory usage.

Sudip told you to line wrap the changelog but it's still not wrapped.

Anyway, please step back and rethink the whole approach.  It doesn't
save any memory when you consider how variables are stored in memory
(alignment) and it doesn't make the code more readable.

Both "bits.e" and "BIT_CHK(bits, LCD_BIT_E_MASK)" are terrible.  The new
one is worse because it takes more words to tell you nothing and because
it is wrong since E is a flag not a mask.

Think about how you can make it more clear.

regards,
dan carpenter

--
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/