Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the vfs-brauner tree

[Mark Brown]

On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 09:12:44PM +0200, Jori Koolstra wrote:
> > Op 18-05-2026 19:13 CEST schreef Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>:

> > Figured it'd be an arch specific version of a similar thing - I didn't
> > audit them as you can see.

> These confusions with octal numbers in lists that aren't even ordered is
> why I would prefer to use shifted values instead. I don't see any reason
> actually why we should not just convert them all, apart from churning and
> perhaps not doing it correctly (which would be bad). My rationale for mixing
> was to use 1 << n at least for the remaining bits. If I remember correctly,
> this is also what Aleksa preferred.

Yeah, shifted values do make sense to me as well - other than the
inconsistent style the only issue I saw was that it's a bit less obvious
that the values collide.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature