linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <20060726235115.3772ec1e.pj@sgi.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Jul 2006 23:51:15 -0700
From:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To:	Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>
Cc:	arnd.bergmann@...ibm.com, ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...l.org, jeff@...zik.org,
	adobriyan@...il.com, vlobanov@...akeasy.net,
	jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de, getshorty_@...mail.com,
	pwil3058@...pond.net.au, mb@...sch.de, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
	stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de, larsbj@...lik.net
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)

Nicholas wrote:
> If _Bool does end up in the user-kernel ABI

I'd be inclined to not put a _Bool in that ABI.
I'd stick with the scalar ints and such we have now.

The benefits of compile type checking are weaker
across that ABI, and the demands of compatibility
much higher than they are for kernel internals.

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.925.600.0401
-
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/