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

[Christian Brauner]

On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 03:58:05PM +0200, Jori Koolstra wrote:
> 
> > Op 19-05-2026 18:24 CEST schreef Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > 
> >  
> > 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.
> 
> Yeah, that's unfortunate.
> 
> @Christian, can we get rid of these octal values? Or is that too much churn?

Do it.