From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Jiri Kosina <trivial@kernel.org>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial treewide: Convert dev_set_uevent_suppress argument to bool
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 17:51:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1472777516.4176.149.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BLUPR02MB1683CF8A399E613B8C209C3B81E50@BLUPR02MB1683.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 00:47 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 09/01/16 13:11, Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > Assigning an int to a bitfield:1 can lose precision.
> > Change the caller argument uses from 1/0 to true/false.
> Hello Joe,
Hi Bart.
> Can you clarify how assigning 0 or 1 to a one-bit bitfield can cause a
> loss of precision?
There are no existing defects.
Using 1/0 is not a loss of precision, it's just
changing to use bool avoids potential errors and
promotes consistency.
Other uses of this function already use true/false.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
Jiri Kosina <trivial@kernel.org>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial treewide: Convert dev_set_uevent_suppress argument to bool
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 17:51:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1472777516.4176.149.camel@perches.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BLUPR02MB1683CF8A399E613B8C209C3B81E50@BLUPR02MB1683.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 00:47 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 09/01/16 13:11, Joe Perches wrote:
> >
> > Assigning an int to a bitfield:1 can lose precision.
> > Change the caller argument uses from 1/0 to true/false.
> Hello Joe,
Hi Bart.
> Can you clarify how assigning 0 or 1 to a one-bit bitfield can cause a�
> loss of precision?
There are no existing defects.
Using 1/0 is not a loss of precision, it's just
changing to use bool avoids potential errors and
promotes consistency.
Other uses of this function already use true/false.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-02 0:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-01 20:11 [PATCH] trivial treewide: Convert dev_set_uevent_suppress argument to bool Joe Perches
2016-09-02 0:47 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-09-02 0:47 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-09-02 0:51 ` Joe Perches [this message]
2016-09-02 0:51 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-02 13:41 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-09-02 13:41 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-09-02 15:41 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-02 15:41 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-02 15:59 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-09-02 16:49 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-02 16:49 ` Joe Perches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1472777516.4176.149.camel@perches.com \
--to=joe@perches.com \
--cc=Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miklos@szeredi.hu \
--cc=oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=trivial@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.