From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] KVM: MMU: return bool in __rmap_write_protect
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:25:30 +0300
Message-ID: <4F8AB02A.9020601@redhat.com>
References: <4F87FA69.5060106@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F87FBC1.5010907@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120414110031.38450bebfe712215f01d529f@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120414110031.38450bebfe712215f01d529f@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 04/14/2012 05:00 AM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:11:13 +0800
> Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > The reture value of __rmap_write_protect is either 1 or 0, use
> > true/false instead of these
>
> ...
>
> > @@ -1689,7 +1690,7 @@ static void mmu_sync_children(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > 
> >  	kvm_mmu_pages_init(parent, &parents, &pages);
> >  	while (mmu_unsync_walk(parent, &pages)) {
> > -		int protected = 0;
> > +		bool protected = false;
> > 
> >  		for_each_sp(pages, sp, parents, i)
> >  			protected |= rmap_write_protect(vcpu->kvm, sp->gfn);
>
> Isn't this the reason we prefer int to bool?
>
> Not sure people like to use |= with boolean.
>

Why not?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function