linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] configfs: use 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>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210920141530.GA25156@lst.de>
Date:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 16:15:30 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jack Winch <sunt.un.morcov@...il.com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-doc <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] configfs: use BIT() for internal flags

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 04:13:37PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 4:09 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 04:05:03PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > For better readability and maintenance: use the BIT() macro for flag
> > > definitions.
> >
> > NAK.  BIT() is the stupidest macro in the kernel and shall not be used
> > ever.  And I'm pretty sure we had this discussion a few times.
> 
> Yep and the general consensus among the kernel developers still is to
> use the BIT() macro. Even for this patch there were three separate
> comments from high-profile developers to use BIT().
> 
> Also: this really is bikeshedding at this point, given that the core
> subject of this series is elsewhere.

Given that we had this dicussion before I'll gladly tell you that your
any seris with a BIT() conversion will go stright to /dev/null after
the first warning from now on.  You had more than one warning.