Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-207791-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:00:18 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: Luis Felipe Hernandez <luis.hernandez093@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
	Evgeniy Dushistov <dushistov@mail.ru>,
	Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/ufs: Use LUT for dir entry types
Message-ID: <2024061008-granddad-aspirin-4208@gregkh>
References: <20240610034219.14711-1-luis.hernandez093@gmail.com>
 <0485dd2d-488a-40e9-b0f7-24236b9c00ab@web.de>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <0485dd2d-488a-40e9-b0f7-24236b9c00ab@web.de>

On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 09:48:09AM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > As per the original TODO, replacing the switch statement with a lookup
> > table results in more concise mapping logic and improved performance.
> …
> 
> Can imperative wordings be relevant for another improved change description?
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10-rc2#n94
> 
> 
> …
> > +++ b/fs/ufs/util.h
> …
> >  static inline void
> >  ufs_set_de_type(struct super_block *sb, struct ufs_dir_entry *de, int mode)
> …
> > +	if (mode_index < ARRAY_SIZE(ufs_mode_to_dt))
> > +		de->d_u.d_44.d_type = ufs_mode_to_dt[mode_index];
> > +	else
> >  		de->d_u.d_44.d_type = DT_UNKNOWN;
> …
> 
> May a conditional operator expression be applied at this source code place?
> 
> Regards,
> Markus
> 

Hi,

This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.

Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless
review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing
list.  I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore.  Please do not
bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and
features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.

Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to
follow it at all.  The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by
almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of
behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and
inability to adapt to feedback.  Please feel free to also ignore emails
from them.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot