linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Make use of UFS

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: <e26087fe-5e1b-c103-668d-43818765d3c9@samsung.com>
Date:   Tue, 29 Aug 2017 16:35:13 +0530
From:   Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "vinholikatti@...il.com" <vinholikatti@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: ufs: Make use of UFS_BIT macro wherever possible

Hi Bart,
Thanks for your review.

On 08/28/2017 09:15 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-08-28 at 17:49 +0530, Alim Akhtar wrote:
>> This entire file uses UFS_BIT macro for bits definition, expect for few
>> places. This patch convert those defines to use UFS_BIT macro to be aligned
>> with reset of the file.
> 
> This is the definition of the UFS_BIT() macro I found in
> drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshci.h:
> 
> #define UFS_BIT(x)	(1L << (x))
> 
> Using this macro makes code longer instead of shorter and does not improve
> code readability. Is this macro really useful? Wouldn't it be better to
> remove the UFS_BIT() macro instead of introducing more uses of it?
> 
Well, the intension of this patch is to make use of already existing 
UFS_BIT() macro.

I am not aware of the history why this macro was created at first place.

Well, it does improve code readability, for me at least, no need for one 
to do a calculation to see which bit it is, as we pass _bit_ number to 
UFS_BIT.

I am totally okay, if you or other reviewers suggests me to change 
UFS_BIT to actual bit position, something like the original case, which 
this patch is trying to change.

> Thanks,
> 
> Bart.
> 
Thanks!
Alim