Re: [PATCH 0254/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

[Doug Ledford]

On Tue, 2016-08-02 at 10:20 -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 09:12:54AM -0500, Steve Wise wrote:
> > > 
> > > Acked-by: Steve Wise <swise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > 
> > I have to ask, why did you ack all these? There's several things
> > wrong with
> > this patch series, but even the point of the patch is mistaken. It
> > makes
> > readable code much less readable. When you chmod a file, do you
> > type
> > 
> > Â chmod 0444 file
> > 
> > or do you write
> > 
> > Â chmod S_IRUSR|S_IRGRP|S_IROTH file
> > 
> > ?
> > 
> > Which of the above is easier to figure what is being changed?
> > 
> 
> I assumed this was some global "fix up".ÂÂÂ

It is, but I'm not so sure I don't agree with Steve. ÂI'm not sure this
actually makes things better. ÂAt a minimum, I would argue that Bart's
fix is mandatory before they would get my ack. ÂI would also request
that even though the patches are split up for review, they be squashed
on commit (whoever would want to tackle this monstrous pile of dubious
janitorial stuff).

> > 
> > Not to mention, because the subject is the same for all 1285
> > patches, and you
> > deleted the content of the patch in your ack, there's no way to
> > know what
> > exactly this ack is for (I haven't received the original patch yet
> > because
> > it's probably being ratelimited by some mail server).
> > 
> 
> I acked just the single patches that hit cxgb3/cxgb4.ÂÂBut if this is
> really
> garbage, then ignore my ACKs...
> 
> Steve.
> 

-- 
Doug Ledford <dledford@xxxxxxxxxx>
              GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part