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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 827E6C433E6 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:02:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D33F6233FE for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:02:28 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D33F6233FE Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux-foundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id EFEFB6B0005; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 14:02:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E882F6B0006; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 14:02:27 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id CDACA6B0007; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 14:02:27 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0104.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.104]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1B736B0005 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 14:02:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E5B2C88 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:02:27 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77727074334.09.bears98_47151352755c Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A33F180AD801 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:02:27 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: bears98_47151352755c X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4247 Received: from mail-lj1-f170.google.com (mail-lj1-f170.google.com [209.85.208.170]) by imf15.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 19:02:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-f170.google.com with SMTP id f17so27296299ljg.12 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:02:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pRwEI3btxtj96W25BROzNdz7dSErjaQvsqQaEByDHM0=; b=fslzBvPR1Y7FPiWJFUInGLF01YEuRrj3b2cwqpq5xIHuKS0SOYrSkKduJzKFpFUiy2 WwEaDKL4/QBIHf2eM8UFJBukg1D6G5+BeVl/JIeuykTs4JyKCxKHXZJ5Cu7I63M1Qi0Q Y1GJrxh29gtzCs/T2x4dYzzhvhEfhxpjBFRgk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pRwEI3btxtj96W25BROzNdz7dSErjaQvsqQaEByDHM0=; b=TuiLO55UQ9aoPIWf+gmCYe4mDsD/81V3+N5Ox+rrzyQNNwH3CtAhvDOS/fXP4nBCzo wYC2QoupGB4kl70XFkgH6xosFfI0d/SQ3B+tJ7b+aaZbHfjcceDy+IBAdEntuMeoFEvn /PkWzVS2HgqJWKlIOcL3uM4pm+NwxKe+trr7Wwj2OuEVq1aC4QV/IOAsXyozuHieKqSC I1dUmQ0XpKqM1I1TkDojTmti+AzDx3d639OUn86LQm/mnpwSR23WQClBUrnVDTygPztw O7oveLJYmaC8INXRnCuGyxqZV2q+Kzt5D3ZVzYpRLXw3OrkByuhMR0xxmLNa0PLsIxiO smXQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5338d+ukqXAx3RSBlm+NuPqKS/DOJ9vvZG12aMzU04kjjm54bVzr oZcVD/Nx+QtbbIaPR25mpd7gu97SJ5+K/w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJywqbvcuvm6rSTaOdcMxFXACMDNpRGw1eRSfYwjl+KXBcdZNUOp6nFL+7IXmKHt/1Erq0u9NA== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9214:: with SMTP id k20mr4991293ljg.45.1611169344161; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:02:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-lj1-f178.google.com (mail-lj1-f178.google.com. [209.85.208.178]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j27sm272180lfm.178.2021.01.20.11.02.22 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:02:23 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-f178.google.com with SMTP id j3so7630430ljb.9 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:02:22 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8995:: with SMTP id c21mr4869975lji.251.1611169342502; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:02:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210120173612.20913-1-will@kernel.org> <20210120173612.20913-9-will@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Torvalds Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 11:02:06 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 8/8] mm: Mark anonymous struct field of 'struct vm_fault' as 'const' To: Nick Desaulniers Cc: Will Deacon , LKML , Linux Memory Management List , Linux ARM , Catalin Marinas , Jan Kara , Minchan Kim , Andrew Morton , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Vinayak Menon , Hugh Dickins , kernel-team Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:27 AM Nick Desaulniers wrote: > > Is there a difference between: [ const unnamed struct and individual const members ] Semantically? No. Syntactically the "group the const members together" is a lot cleaner, imho. Not just from a "just a single const" standpoint, but from a "code as documentation" standpoint. But I guess to avoid the clang issue, we could do the "mark individual fields" thing. (It turns out that sparse gets this wrong too, so it's not just clang). Linus