| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1156859592.8082.13.camel@kleikamp.austin.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:53:11 -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 Tue, 2006-08-29 at 15:48 +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote: > Dave Kleikamp wrote: > > >On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 01:33 +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote: > >>What do you say, can you hold on it for a while (can't be urgent, can > >>it?) and see how the conversion go. Will take time for it during this > >>week(end) and if the result is that almost no maintainer wants it, then... > >>Just seem strange to having a boolean function but declaring it integer, > >>for (in my knowledge) no reason. > >> > >> > > > >Sounds good to me. I think I'll go ahead and kill the use of TRUE and > >FALSE, but hold off on the type change for now. > > > > > To 0/1 or false/true? I was going to go ahead with the 0/1 thing, but on second thought, I'll just hold off on the whole thing and see where this ends up. I may go ahead and just accept your original patch. We lived with the ugly, locally-defined TRUE & FALSE this long. Waiting a little longer can't hurt. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists