[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj7jenrb6UNjv--xLC4hrjJDsCFxuaHw1e67a4ihVEmUw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 14:06:51 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Yann Droneaud <ydroneaud@...eya.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
patches@...ts.linux.dev, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>,
"Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@...hat.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 2/7] mm: add VM_DROPPABLE for designating always
lazily freeable mappings
On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 1:42 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
>
> I'd be more inclined to do:
>
> typedef unsigned int vm_flags_t[2];
No, that's entirely invalid.
Never *ever* use arrays in C for type safety. Arrays are not type
safe. They can't be assigned sanely, and they silently become pointers
(which also aren't type-safe, since they end up converting silently to
'void *').
If you want to use the type system to enforce things, and you don't
want to rely on sparse, you absolutely have to use a struct (or union)
type.
So something like
typedef struct { u64 val; } vm_flags_t;
would be an option.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists