linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] KVM: MMU: return bool in __rmap_write

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 14 Apr 2012 11:00:31 +0900
From:	Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
To:	Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] KVM: MMU: return bool in __rmap_write_protect

On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:11:13 +0800
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> The reture value of __rmap_write_protect is either 1 or 0, use
> true/false instead of these

...

> @@ -1689,7 +1690,7 @@ static void mmu_sync_children(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> 
>  	kvm_mmu_pages_init(parent, &parents, &pages);
>  	while (mmu_unsync_walk(parent, &pages)) {
> -		int protected = 0;
> +		bool protected = false;
> 
>  		for_each_sp(pages, sp, parents, i)
>  			protected |= rmap_write_protect(vcpu->kvm, sp->gfn);

Isn't this the reason we prefer int to bool?

Not sure people like to use |= with boolean.

	Takuya
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/