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  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:   Fri, 08 Feb 2019 01:23:37 -0800
From:   Joe Perches <>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <>,,
        Miquel Raynal <>
Cc:     Boris Brezillon <>,
        Brian Norris <>,, Marek Vasut <>,
        Richard Weinberger <>,
        David Woodhouse <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] mtd: rawnand: denali: use bool type instead of
 int where appropriate

On Fri, 2019-02-08 at 17:08 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Use 'bool' type for some function arguments.
>  - write (write or read?)
>  - raw (the raw access mode or not?)
> It is true that denali_nand_info::dma_avail is also boolean, but
> I am keeping it as 'int' because 'scripts/checkpatch --strict' would
> report the following:
> CHECK: Avoid using bool structure members because of possible alignment issues
>   - see:
> I do not think it is a matter here, but I am sticking to the suggestion.

just fyi: that suggestion has been removed by:

commit 7967656ffbfa493f5546c0f18bf8a28f702c4baa
Author: Jason Gunthorpe <>
Date:   Fri Jan 18 15:50:47 2019 -0700

    coding-style: Clarify the expectations around bool
    There has been some confusion since checkpatch started warning about bool
    use in structures, and people have been avoiding using it.
    Many people feel there is still a legitimate place for bool in structures,
    so provide some guidance on bool usage derived from the entire thread that
    spawned the checkpatch warning.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists