Re: [PATCH 0/6] Don't use BIT() macro in UAPI headers

From
Joseph Richey <hidden>
Date
2021-05-20 12:36:36
Also in
kvm, linux-arm-kernel, lkml
Reply to
Borislav Petkov, 2021-05-20
quoted
Currently, the script actually _encourages_ users to use the BIT macro
even if adding things to UAPI.
How so?
Running checkpatch.pl with --strict gives:

CHECK: Prefer using the BIT macro
#26: FILE: arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/hwcap2.h:9:
+#define HWCAP2_FSGSBASE                        (1 << 1)

It should probably just recommend the _BITUL macro.
Also, in your commit messages you refer to patches with patchwork links
- please use the respective upstream commit IDs instead. Grep for
"Fixes:" here:
Ahhhhh, I figured there was a more standard way. Will fix.
Thread (31 messages) 31 messages, 9 authors, last reply 2021-05-24
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread / next series-diff position
kprevious message in thread / previous series-diff position
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help