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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] block: Change to use DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE macro
To:     Frank Lee <tiny.windzz@gmail.com>
Cc:     ed.cashin@acm.org, philipp.reisner@linbit.com,
        Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
        linux-block@vger.kernel.org, josh.h.morris@us.ibm.com,
        pjk1939@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com, nbd@other.debian.org
References: <20181201142414.7766-1-tiny.windzz@gmail.com>
 <5682c419-9e44-10ed-6a2e-286e6f5c5def@kernel.dk>
 <CAEExFWtJEJwgGR3gqfHDXw-c4nyA7dkQTd9fkzVsht=ROmfgMQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Message-ID: <92334639-9d34-5e6a-2c43-945a20077394@kernel.dk>
Date:   Sat, 1 Dec 2018 11:38:48 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEExFWtJEJwgGR3gqfHDXw-c4nyA7dkQTd9fkzVsht=ROmfgMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 12/1/18 11:31 AM, Frank Lee wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 2, 2018 at 2:11 AM Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/1/18 7:24 AM, Yangtao Li wrote:
>>> Use DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE macro to simplify the code.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>> changes in v2:
>>> -Modify some function names to avoid compilation errors
>>
>> The fact that your previous patch didn't even compile doesn't fill me
>> with a lot of confidence in the amount of diligence and testing
>> you apply to your patches.
>>
>> Why would you send something out that you didn't even compile?
>>
>> --
>> Jens Axboe
>>
> These changes are the same and only require a small change.
> Most of the changes are fine, so it's a bit negligent.

When someone is sending a patch for inclusion, at the very minimum
I expect it to have been compiled, and preferably tested too. Doesn't
matter how small the change is, even a one-liner should go through that.

That said, I'm not a huge fan of changes like this. It completely
hides what is going on for someone reading the code, and it's not
like there's a win on code size for example. The only win seems to
be that driver writes can't mess it up, which is a nice benefit.

-- 
Jens Axboe