lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [driver-core PATCH v5 5/9] driver core: Establish clear order of operations for deferred probe and remove
From
Date
On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 17:34 -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 15:48 -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-11-05 at 13:12 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > > One change I made in addition is I replaced the use of "bool X:1" to define
> > > the bitfield to a "u8 X:1" setup in order to resolve some checkpatch
> > > warnings.
> >
> > Please use "bool X:1" instead of "u8 X:1". I think it was a bad idea to make
> > checkpatch complain about "bool X:1" since "bool X:1" should only be avoided
> > in structures for which alignment must be architecture-independent. For struct
> > device it is fine if member alignment differs per architecture. Additionally,
> > changing "bool X:1" into "u8 X:1" will reduce performance on architectures that
> > cannot do byte addressing.
>
> I generally agree. But the checkpatch warning _could_
> be useful in those cases where alignment should be
> architecture-independent.
>
> Any suggestion on how to improve the message?

It would be great if a heuristic could be developed that recognizes structs
for which the data layout must be architecture independent. If such a
heuristic could be developed it could be used to only display warn about
"bool X:n" for such structures.

Bart.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-09 00:43    [W:0.087 / U:0.396 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site