Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1529354549.3092.36.camel@sipsolutions.net>
References: <20180618195618.17536-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
 <CAHp75VdY+PF0Edm_py+UiD3nz77HTQps_8uaRh+Sa3C+UKECKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1529353683.3092.32.camel@sipsolutions.net> <CAHp75VesXgrh-XR-3bFMOF6eE0K=NyRvyY1tw1yOX44rJS9fag@mail.gmail.com>
 <1529354549.3092.36.camel@sipsolutions.net>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 Jun 2018 23:46:06 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75Vd5RHc+CzxR+V5ixgKy5BpmD6Tx3bYG-hsYpAHJdYDgbw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] bitfield: fix *_encode_bits()
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 11:42 PM, Johannes Berg
<johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-06-18 at 23:40 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
>> The idea is to print what was the input, expected output and actual result.
>> Then you would see what exactly is broken.
>
> Yeah, I guess we could. I did some of that work.
>
>> I dunno how much we may take away from this certain test case, though
>> it would be better for my opinion.
>
> TBH though, I'm not sure I want to do this (right now at least). I don't
> think we gain anything from it, it's so basic ... so to me it's just
> pointless extra code.

I'm not insisting I'm trying to specify rationale behind it.
We may add this later at some point.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko