From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:34:22 -0800 Message-ID: <20070216103422.51757e89.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20070210174628.3764.89569.sendpatchset@thinktank.campus.ltu.se> <1171132062.3373.31.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <20070212122738.b5e9a8af.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1171644132.3443.27.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:57609 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1946206AbXBPSe3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Feb 2007 13:34:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1171644132.3443.27.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: ricknu-0@student.ltu.se, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 10:42:12 -0600 James Bottomley wrote: > On Mon, 2007-02-12 at 12:27 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Given that we now have a standard kernel-wide, c99-friendly way of > > expressing true and false, I'd suggest that this decision can be revisited. > > > > Because a "true" is significantly more meaningful (and hence readable) > > thing than a bare "1". > > OK, I'm really not happy with doing this for three reasons: > > 1. It's inviting huge amounts of driver churn changing bitfields to > booleans > > 2. I do find it to be a readability issue. Like most driver writers, > I'm used to register layouts, and those are simple bitfields, so I don't > tend to think true and false, I think 1 and 0. > > 3. Having a different, special, type for single bit bitfields (while > still using u for multi bit bitfields) is asking for confusion, and > hence trouble at the driver level. > Confused. The patch changes TRUE to true and FALSE to false. The code wasn't using bitfields before and isn't using them afterwards. I wouldn't expect there to be any change in generated code. All it's doing is replacing the driver's private TRUE/FALSE with the kernel-wide ones.