Re: [PATCH] pwm: core: Use octal permission

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:41:31AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2020-11-18 at 10:35 +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> 
> > Actually I'd prefer keeping the symbolic name because this is easier to
> > grep for. So to convince me a better reason than "checkpatch says so" is
> > needed.
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFw5v23T-zvDZp-MmD_EYxF8WbafwwB59934FV7g21uMGQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:58:29 -0400
> 
> The symbolic names are good for the *other* bits (ie sticky bit, and
> the inode mode _type_ numbers etc), but for the permission bits, the
> symbolic names are just insane crap. Nobody sane should ever use them.
> Not in the kernel, not in user space.
> 
>            Linus

OK, "Linus says so" is considerably stronger than "checkpatch says so".
So if you respin the patch with a better commit log, that's fine for me.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature