linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] configfs: use (1UL << bit) for internal flags

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 4 Dec 2020 21:23:50 +0100
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] configfs: use (1UL << bit) for internal flags

On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 8:06 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, December 4, 2020, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
>>
>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>>
>> For better readability and maintenance: use the (1UL << bit) for flag
>> definitions.
>>
>
> And I didn’t get why BIT can’t be used?
> Maybe some elaboration?
>

I agree that BIT() would be better and did try it in v2[1].

Bartosz

[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg2398294.html