From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 01/23] asm: simd context helper API
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 21:20:50 -0700
Message-ID: <8afdd3b1c51587708db6ae878eb0a7e9f8b5673a.camel@perches.com>
References: <20180925145622.29959-1-Jason@zx2c4.com>
         <20180925145622.29959-2-Jason@zx2c4.com>
         <CAKv+Gu9e35+AyktmSq9qeNE0LR83_yrEEB3DiQv0bmyArivqRQ@mail.gmail.com>
         <CAKv+Gu9kbLPZH4W0zKAfuv-b11mcDaZ05HUauvh9gMZVGVR0AQ@mail.gmail.com>
         <CAHmME9pfs0_MsD9QAGfSm31_w-=6BCF_gZO04XkfhD=mEoZmtQ@mail.gmail.com>
         <CAKv+Gu__7mZFFq6qC=8yh0OuaV+TCCLFt6nm8yJfaANHUPrJ=A@mail.gmail.com>
         <CAHmME9owF+3aQaZUkK4KkfnJna+DK=GoWV8yf-Wb+gH4w3y9eg@mail.gmail.com>
         <CAKv+Gu9FAVVOiYyGovYZ19-107_6sK9Ya6LnK=AQkTgctMmu5A@mail.gmail.com>
         <CAHmME9rqsOid6UOx+VTsFzJLEiaXpTP_z_wvHC6MbeAQUeEtHg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Crypto Mailing List <linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Samuel Neves <sneves@dei.uc.pt>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAHmME9rqsOid6UOx+VTsFzJLEiaXpTP_z_wvHC6MbeAQUeEtHg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-crypto.vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 2018-09-28 at 16:01 +0200, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 4:00 PM Ard Biesheuvel
> <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On 28 September 2018 at 15:59, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 3:58 PM Ard Biesheuvel
> > > <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On 28 September 2018 at 15:47, Jason A. Donenfeld <Jason@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:49 AM Ard Biesheuvel
> > > > > <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > +typedef enum {
> > > > > > > > +       HAVE_NO_SIMD = 1 << 0,
> > > > > > > > +       HAVE_FULL_SIMD = 1 << 1,
> > > > > > > > +       HAVE_SIMD_IN_USE = 1 << 31
> > > > > > > > +} simd_context_t;
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Oh, and another thing (and I'm surprised checkpatch.pl didn't complain
> > > > > > about it): the use of typedef in new code is strongly discouraged.
> > > > > > This policy predates my involvement, so perhaps Joe can elaborate on
> > > > > > the rationale?
> > > > > 
> > > > > In case it matters, the motivation for making this a typedef is I
> > > > > could imagine this at some point turning into a more complicated
> > > > > struct on certain platforms and that would make refactoring easier. I
> > > > > could just make it `struct simd_context` now with 1 member though...
> > > > 
> > > > Yes that makes sense
> > > 
> > > The rationale for it being a typedef or moving to a struct now?
> > 
> > Yes just switch to a struct.
> 
> Okay. No problem with that, but will wait to hear from Joe first.

Why do you need to hear from me again?

As far as I know, the only info about typedef avoidance are in
Documentation/process/coding-style.rst section 5.