On 2018-04-19 06:42 PM, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
On 2018-04-19 02:48 PM, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
On 2018-04-19 01:16 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 06:40 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
On 2018-04-19 02:48 PM, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
On 2018-04-19 01:16 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 06:40 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 +0800, yuank...@codeau
On 2018-04-19 01:16 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 06:40 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 +0800, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > > Hi julia,
> > >
> > > On 2018-04-1
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 06:40 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 +0800, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > > > Hi julia,
> > > >
> > > > On 2018-04-15 05:19 AM, Julia Lawall wrot
On Thu, 2018-04-19 at 06:40 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 +0800, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > > Hi julia,
> > >
> > > On 2018-04-15 05:19 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> > >
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 +0800, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > Hi julia,
> >
> > On 2018-04-15 05:19 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 08:22 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > >
On Tue, 2018-04-17 at 17:07 +0800, yuank...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> Hi julia,
>
> On 2018-04-15 05:19 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 08:22 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > > On W
Hi julia,
On 2018-04-15 05:19 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 08:22 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:29 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > We already have some 500 bools-in-str
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 08:22 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:29 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > We already have some 500 bools-in-structs
> > >
> > > I got at least triple that only
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 14:08:32 +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > It'd be _much_ nicer if vger.kernel.org stored every email
> > it sent and had a search mechanism available rather than
> > relying on external systems.
>
> People are looking at that afaik.
I have linux-kernel mboxes going back to Oc
On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 14:08 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:01:37AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 13:50 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:35:21AM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > > Is there a better or recommended way to re
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 05:01:37AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 13:50 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:35:21AM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > > Is there a better or recommended way to reference posts on LKML in commit
> > > messages? (I do like the id
On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 13:50 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:35:21AM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> > Is there a better or recommended way to reference posts on LKML in commit
> > messages? (I do like the idea of linking to previous discussions, results,
> > ...)
>
> Yes:
>
Andrea Parri writes:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 09:47:19AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> * Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>
>> > I still have room in my /dev/null mailbox for pure checkpatch patches.
>> >
>> > > (ooh, https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/384 is working this morning)
>> >
>> > Yes, we r
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:35:21AM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote:
> Is there a better or recommended way to reference posts on LKML in commit
> messages? (I do like the idea of linking to previous discussions, results,
> ...)
Yes:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/$MSGID
that has the added benefit that it
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 09:47:19AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > I still have room in my /dev/null mailbox for pure checkpatch patches.
> >
> > > (ooh, https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/384 is working this morning)
> >
> > Yes, we really should not use lkml.or
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 11:42:20PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> I personally do not find a significant issue with
> uncontrolled sizes of bool in kernel structs as
> all of the kernel structs are transitory and not
> written out to storage.
People that care about cache locality, false sharing and o
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 09:47:19AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> lkml.org is nice in emails that have a short expected life time and relevance
> -
I like lkml.org's archive (although it's not without its problems), but
the site suffers from serious availability issues -- it is down a lot,
which is
* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I still have room in my /dev/null mailbox for pure checkpatch patches.
>
> > (ooh, https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/384 is working this morning)
>
> Yes, we really should not use lkml.org for references. Sadly google
> displays it very prominently when you search for
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 08:22 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:29 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > We already have some 500 bools-in-structs
> > >
> > > I got at least triple that only
On Thu, 2018-04-12 at 08:22 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:29 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > We already have some 500 bools-in-structs
> >
> > I got at least triple that only in include/
> > so I expect there are at probably an
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Joe Perches wrote:
> (Adding Julia Lawall)
>
> On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:29 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > We already have some 500 bools-in-structs
>
> I got at least triple that only in include/
> so I expect there are at probably an order
> of magnitude more than 500 in t
On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 09:29:59AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> OK. I guess. But I'm not really seeing some snappy description which
> helps people understand why checkpatch is warning about this.
"Results in architecture dependent layout."
is the best short sentence I can come up with.
(Adding Julia Lawall)
On Wed, 2018-04-11 at 09:29 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> We already have some 500 bools-in-structs
I got at least triple that only in include/
so I expect there are at probably an order
of magnitude more than 500 in the kernel.
I suppose some cocci script could count the
a
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 10:15:02 +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 03:00:11PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 14:53:51 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 14:39 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:19:54 -0700 Joe Pe
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 03:00:11PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 14:53:51 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 14:39 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:19:54 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> > >
> > > > A struct with a bool member can have dif
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 14:53:51 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 14:39 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:19:54 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > > A struct with a bool member can have different sizes on various
> > > architectures because neither bool size nor a
On Tue, 2018-04-10 at 14:39 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:19:54 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
>
> > A struct with a bool member can have different sizes on various
> > architectures because neither bool size nor alignment is standardized.
>
> What's wrong with bools in structs?
On Tue, 10 Apr 2018 11:19:54 -0700 Joe Perches wrote:
> A struct with a bool member can have different sizes on various
> architectures because neither bool size nor alignment is standardized.
>
> So emit a message on the use of bool in structs only in .h files and
> not .c files.
>
> There is
A struct with a bool member can have different sizes on various
architectures because neither bool size nor alignment is standardized.
So emit a message on the use of bool in structs only in .h files and
not .c files.
There is the real possibility that this test could have a false positive
when a
30 matches
Mail list logo
