Messages in this thread |  | | From | Menglong Dong <> | Date | Sun, 7 Feb 2021 11:29:40 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next] net: socket: use BIT_MASK for MSG_* |
| |
Hello!
On Sat, Feb 6, 2021 at 4:20 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Saturday, February 6, 2021, <menglong8.dong@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> From: Menglong Dong <dong.menglong@zte.com.cn> >> >> The bit mask for MSG_* seems a little confused here. Replace it >> with BIT_MASK to make it clear to understand. > > > It makes it more confusing if you understand the difference between BIT_MASK() and BIT(). I think you have to use the latter. And note () when referring to the function or macro. >
I replaced BIT_MASK() with BIT() in the patch of v2, and it looks much more tidy. I can't figure out the difference between BIT() and BIT_MASK(), seems the latter one more safe... isn't it?
Thanks:) Menglong Dong
|  |