[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiOecmzTXoc6hbTmYdBCyhkmOpAHeMVXmJ_DEGgjPfZ5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:02:06 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Vinayak Menon <vinmenon@...eaurora.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@...roid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 8/8] mm: Mark anonymous struct field of 'struct
vm_fault' as 'const'
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:27 AM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Is there a difference between: [ const unnamed struct and individual const members ]
Semantically? No.
Syntactically the "group the const members together" is a lot cleaner,
imho. Not just from a "just a single const" standpoint, but from a
"code as documentation" standpoint.
But I guess to avoid the clang issue, we could do the "mark individual
fields" thing.
(It turns out that sparse gets this wrong too, so it's not just clang).
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists