From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
To: Breno Rodrigues Alves <breno3011alves@gmail.com>
Cc: linux@armlinux.org.uk, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, mkp@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Breno Rodrigues Alves <breno3011alves@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] scsi: arm: Convert acornscsi-io.S to C
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2026 16:46:14 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o6clz749.fsf@trenco.lwn.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261022222819.92507-1-breno3011alves@gmail.com>
Breno Rodrigues Alves <breno3011alves@gmail.com> writes:
> You are also right about the broader point: "assembly to C" on its own
> is not a justification. The kernel's assembly is there for reasons, and
> translating it for its own sake is churn that reviewers have to pay for.
> I have been approaching this as a translation exercise, and that is not
> the right frame. I will not propose further conversions of that kind
> without a concrete functional benefit - something that fixes a bug that
> can actually be hit, or enables a change that cannot be done in assembly.
Note that conversion to C can be justified if it eases the maintenance
of the file in question. In this case, there's not really been any need
for maintenance, so (in my mind) little need for translation.
> Bart's Reviewed-by: stands on the technical merits of the change as a
> change (the C code is equivalent to the assembly for even lengths and
> correct for odd ones). Your concern is a different question - whether
> the change should exist at all. Both are valid, and the decision
> belongs to the SCSI maintainers, not to me.
Bart's word outweighs mine here, just to be clear.
jon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-22 22:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-22 18:36 [PATCH 0/1] " Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 18:36 ` [PATCH] " Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 18:52 ` [PATCH v2 0/1] " Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 18:52 ` [PATCH v2] " Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 19:22 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-10-22 20:30 ` Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 21:02 ` Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 20:30 ` [PATCH v3] " Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 20:49 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-10-22 21:02 ` [PATCH v4] " Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 21:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-10-22 21:44 ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-10-22 21:48 ` Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 22:15 ` Jonathan Corbet
2026-10-22 22:28 ` Breno Rodrigues Alves
2026-10-22 22:46 ` Jonathan Corbet [this message]
2026-10-22 23:00 ` Breno Rodrigues Alves
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87o6clz749.fsf@trenco.lwn.net \
--to=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=breno3011alves@gmail.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=mkp@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®