Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754366AbbETTnH (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2015 15:43:07 -0400 Received: from mail-ig0-f171.google.com ([209.85.213.171]:36590 "EHLO mail-ig0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752945AbbETTnC (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 May 2015 15:43:02 -0400 Message-ID: <555CE3C4.7010406@kernel.dk> Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 13:43:00 -0600 From: Jens Axboe User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jagan Teki CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Use BIT macro from include/linux/bitops.h References: <1431976472-27596-1-git-send-email-jteki@openedev.com> <555CDF0A.9080006@kernel.dk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 900 Lines: 25 On 05/20/2015 01:41 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: > On 21 May 2015 at 00:52, Jens Axboe wrote: >> On 05/18/2015 01:14 PM, Jagan Teki wrote: >>> >>> Replace (1 << nr) to BIT(nr) where nr = 0, 1, 2 .... 31 >> >> >> I don't like it, I think it hurts readability. > > What do you mean by don't like, using kernel defined macro instead of > numerical assignments huts readability? In the context of the patch, BIT(0) == (1 << 0) is obvious. But if I just came across BIT(7) in the code, I'd have to check, whereas anyone would immediately know that (1 << 7) is the 7th bit set. Hence, readability is worse, and that's important. -- Jens Axboe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/