linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs: dcache: Use bool return value instead of int

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]

Date:	Sun, 24 Jan 2016 21:27:29 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Chen Gang <chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	nicolas.iooss_linux@....org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: dcache: Use bool return value instead of int

On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 05:19:43AM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> Hello all:
> 
> Is this patch OK? shall I send the other patch based on this one? (the
> other patch is v3 trivial patch for include/linux/dcache.h).
> 
> And sorry for replying late: the last week, I was not in Beijing, had to
> be busy for analyzing a Linux kernel usb related issue for my company's
> customer in Guangzhou (but at last, I guess, it is not kernel issue).

Again, do you have _any_ evidence of improved code generation with that
patch?  Because if you do, I would really like to see it, so I could file
bugs against gcc optimizer.

Your impression of what _Bool is and what semantics does it have appears
to be rather different from that described in C99, but that's a secondary
issue - first and foremost, on which .config and with which gcc version
do you see improvements from that change?