From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>
To: jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
WireGuard mailing list <wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com>,
Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireguard: queueing: Fix implicit type conversion
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 16:27:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHmME9p9EA0qCw2ha_X9HR7NWSt1Zam4+srYHCs=-U4LvQiJdA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1635469664-1708957-1-git-send-email-jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn>
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 3:08 AM Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn> wrote:
> It is universally accepted that the implicit type conversion is
> terrible.
I'm not so sure about this, but either way, I think this needs a bit
more justification and analysis to merge. cpumask_weight returns an
unsigned, for example, and is used as a modulo operand later in the
function. It looks like nr_cpumask_bits is also unsigned. And so on.
So you're really trading one implicit type conversion package for
another. If you're swapping these around, why? It can't be because,
"it is universally accepted that the implicit type conversion is
terrible," since you're adding more of it in a different form. Is your
set of implicit type conversions semantically more proper? If so,
please describe that. Alternatively, is there a way to harmonize
everything into one type? Is there a minimal set of casts that enables
that?
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-29 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-29 1:07 Jiasheng Jiang
2021-10-29 14:27 ` Jason A. Donenfeld [this message]
2021-10-29 15:30 ` Eric Dumazet
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='CAHmME9p9EA0qCw2ha_X9HR7NWSt1Zam4+srYHCs=-U4LvQiJdA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).