On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 10:55:23AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 04/13/2018 10:35 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > On Apr 13, 2018, at 10:11 AM, Christian Brauner
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Consistenly use << to define ST_* constants. This also aligns them with
> >> their MS_* counterparts in fs.h
> >
On 04/13/2018 10:35 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On Apr 13, 2018, at 10:11 AM, Christian Brauner
> 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
On Apr 13, 2018, at 10:11 AM, Christian Brauner
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 thi
On 04/13/2018 09:11 AM, Christian Brauner wrote:
> Consistenly use << to define ST_* constants. This also aligns them with
> their MS_* counterparts in fs.h
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner
> ---
> include/linux/statfs.h | 26 +-
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13
Consistenly use << to define ST_* constants. This also aligns them with
their MS_* counterparts in fs.h
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner
---
include/linux/statfs.h | 26 +-
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/statfs.h b/include/li
5 matches
Mail list logo