linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm2] fs/jfs: Conversion to generic boolean

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: <1156799492.8732.19.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Aug 2006 16:11:32 -0500
From:	Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...tin.ibm.com>
To:	Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se>
Cc:	akpm@...l.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm2] fs/jfs: Conversion to generic boolean

On Mon, 2006-08-28 at 22:42 +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote:

> Just why is it, that when there is a change to make locally defined 
> booleans into a more generic one, it is converted into integers? ;)

I just see this as an opportunity to make jfs more closely fit the
coding style of the mainline kernel.

> But seriously, what is gained by removing them, other then less 
> understandable code? (Not talking about FALSE -> 0, but boolean_t -> int)

I don't feel strongly one way or another about the use of boolean_t, but
under fs/, the only code that uses that type is in fs/jfs and fs/xfs,
which are both ported from other operating systems.  Using ints for
boolean values does seem to be the accepted practice in the kernel.

> I can understand if authors disprove making an integer into a boolean, 
> but here it already were booleans.
> But hey, you are the maintainer ;)

I could be persuaded to leave the declarations as boolean_t or even
making them bool, but right now I'm leaning toward making them int for
consistency.

Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center

-
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/