On 04/13/2018 10:35 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Apr 13, 2018, at 10:11 AM, Christian Brauner > <christian.brau...@ubuntu.com> wrote: >> >> Consistenly use << to define ST_* constants. This also aligns them with >> their MS_* counterparts in fs.h > > IMHO, using (1 << 10) makes the code harder to debug. If you see a field > in a structure like 0x8354, it is non-trivial to map this to the ST_* > flags if they are declared in the form (1 << 10) or BIT(10). If they are > declared in the form 0x100 (as they are now) then it is trivial that the > ST_APPEND flag is set in 0x8354, and easy to understand the other flags. > > So, my preference would be to NOT land this or the previous patch.
That makes sense to me. -- ~Randy
