From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.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: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 08:59:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7405780b-3dcd-3c6a-9268-3fac6f3a7b3f@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1472830862.6758.7.camel@perches.com>
On 09/02/2016 08:41 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 13:41 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> On 09/01/16 17:51, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> 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.
>>>> 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.
>> In the patch description you refer to loss of precision. However, your
>> patch does not address any loss of precision issues. So I think that the
>> patch description is misleading and could be made more clear.
>
> I tend towards terse being better than verbose.
> The original patch description says
>
> "no change to objects"
>
> What would you suggest?
Hello Joe,
How about the following:
dev_set_uevent_suppress() expects a boolean as second argument. Make
this clear by passing true/false instead of 1/0 as the second argument.
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-02 15:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ 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 0:51 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-02 13:41 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-09-02 15:41 ` Joe Perches
2016-09-02 15:59 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
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=7405780b-3dcd-3c6a-9268-3fac6f3a7b3f@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=joe@perches.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox