From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BE58C32789 for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 01:34:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BABF2086B for ; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 01:34:39 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0BABF2086B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=perches.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731078AbeKGLCo (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Nov 2018 06:02:44 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0068.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.68]:44502 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727248AbeKGLCo (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Nov 2018 06:02:44 -0500 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 892891802959F; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 01:34:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-HE-Tag: patch34_44d87b8aa7d57 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2195 Received: from XPS-9350.home (unknown [47.151.153.53]) (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf20.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 7 Nov 2018 01:34:32 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <499e4358e72fca510fa6fcfb76ea3ac3792db08f.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [driver-core PATCH v5 5/9] driver core: Establish clear order of operations for deferred probe and remove From: Joe Perches To: Bart Van Assche , Alexander Duyck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, tj@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, rafael@kernel.org, len.brown@intel.com, pavel@ucw.cz, zwisler@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, dave.jiang@intel.com Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2018 17:34:31 -0800 In-Reply-To: <1541548114.196084.195.camel@acm.org> References: <154145223352.29224.8912797012647157172.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <154145232484.29224.1635232599636954462.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <1541548114.196084.195.camel@acm.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.1-1build1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2018-11-06 at 15:48 -0800, Bart Van Assche wrote: > On Mon, 2018-11-05 at 13:12 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > One change I made in addition is I replaced the use of "bool X:1" to define > > the bitfield to a "u8 X:1" setup in order to resolve some checkpatch > > warnings. > > Please use "bool X:1" instead of "u8 X:1". I think it was a bad idea to make > checkpatch complain about "bool X:1" since "bool X:1" should only be avoided > in structures for which alignment must be architecture-independent. For struct > device it is fine if member alignment differs per architecture. Additionally, > changing "bool X:1" into "u8 X:1" will reduce performance on architectures that > cannot do byte addressing. I generally agree. But the checkpatch warning _could_ be useful in those cases where alignment should be architecture-independent. Any suggestion on how to improve the message? s