From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wr1-f48.google.com (mail-wr1-f48.google.com [209.85.221.48]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D06BB28E3 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 08:47:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f48.google.com with SMTP id y16so8154676wrt.12 for ; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:47:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=W8yesRaMT9U9EPQtxhglkNQFwFn6THQr7croFXK/hL0=; b=BQCPMqEU+tav4fAKLNTDSFamkeKMJ7PyFG/eqNkTaVocPgGaeu/o81Az+aFS4rY3vQ FSBHdHxuoVzNV8GkFNUgw/AR27/L+I4vy3cWFcFJOWSAStt4QKCZYPyZXAJPi1CykqiD U59wQtAxRyrvoK5ogzqb6KRiW8Tg9Qn8RocmZa8+qB7rvfsJ1eO8wNjiiPNlJgUcvTt4 F6sI5myF3P0JhBD/CCq51HPwdfp3T4vqc4s9zl0fs6QFjgeeLQWhwXwyyq6eGU5mMlFM 89lg8x7T+j2fx2JVpyoXh2jWLvMQk+eEzX6QhIunNZhiM1i24r+U2KLW+T6/RZL31P7g a74A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=W8yesRaMT9U9EPQtxhglkNQFwFn6THQr7croFXK/hL0=; b=aa2k0eTyKF1jBHibtxJtihGRnQOVsuw5Cdi9DhyB7XB/5FYitryzV7cClXCLbVUdCH IbWo0WY+x+ene51OXWe9uk+U1wdadL3kXFNt+A2o096cFWuNGw/LPmNNdkOJm0wJkUO4 UWlEblYyUHmDIlCNCw4QiVIRh8wrhjYSG2nQwEyTX0LD1ngY/p5hXV3DxzpHAjVSG4vz j/+Didcbqpyg4GpYg8zugvXUowuAAO6bSFeiP97Z4xZMsvBcf6guAjygRGSA407q+Zts D2p8m24KVj7rtipYIgw46qZZWZ3nDgBVIgRR3D6NtH3zxKT08zF80KYAMk/NEeQTLtQa eKGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pkNfRaluVjMl/rv5Qa1mgU7ipNd31XjvzVyTZwFvTbfq2Qy/Hju SZQflOP8O4WYpgpOw+EKvoI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf52m/asu+x56hmdWbfjzZRDrKndKiYuCi/TRdN/w1uQoxQ6QJzkkUQKyRh1mtaHb/YpPt64AA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4d09:0:b0:235:e330:71ba with SMTP id z9-20020a5d4d09000000b00235e33071bamr3673651wrt.213.1668761255990; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:47:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([102.36.222.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fn25-20020a05600c689900b003cf78aafdd7sm3687144wmb.39.2022.11.18.00.47.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 18 Nov 2022 00:47:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 11:47:32 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Stefan Wahren Cc: Dave Stevenson , kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com, Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Hans Verkuil , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Umang Jain , Ray Jui , Broadcom internal kernel review list , Florian Fainelli , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-staging@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] vc04_services: Promote bool usage Message-ID: References: <20221117160015.344528-1-umang.jain@ideasonboard.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 07:11:41PM +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote: > Hi Dave, > > Am 17.11.22 um 17:00 schrieb Umang Jain: > > In commit 7967656ffbfa ("coding-style: Clarify the expectations around > > bool") the check to dis-allow bool structure members was removed from > > checkpatch.pl. It promotes bool structure members to store boolean > > values. This enhances code readability. > > > > Umang Jain (3): > > Revert "staging: mmal-vchiq: Avoid use of bool in structures" > > vc04_services: mmal-vchiq: Use bool for vchiq_mmal_component.in_use > > vc04_services: bcm2835-camera: Use bool values for > > mmal_fmt.remove_padding > > > > .../bcm2835-camera/bcm2835-camera.c | 30 +++++++++---------- > > .../vc04_services/vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.c | 18 +++++------ > > .../vc04_services/vchiq-mmal/mmal-vchiq.h | 6 ++-- > could you please check these changes to be safe? I'm not sure that the > affected declarations are really internal. I'm afraid this might affect > firmware or userspace. The structs have a bunch of kernel pointers in them so hopefully they are internal. Otherwise we have a different sort of problem. regards, dan carpenter