From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753715AbdLMCPM (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:15:12 -0500 Received: from cmccmta1.chinamobile.com ([221.176.66.79]:22251 "EHLO cmccmta1.chinamobile.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752515AbdLMCOg (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:14:36 -0500 X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee45a308d08ddd-f9aaf X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0 X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000 X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee45a308d0998e-25e9e Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:14:28 -0500 From: Yaowei Bai To: Randy Dunlap Cc: David Rientjes , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] make some functions return bool Message-ID: <20171213021427.GB28668@byw> Reply-To: baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com References: <1513047319-22302-1-git-send-email-baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com> <20171212072130.GA12496@byw> <0c71240b-ae6a-1233-3a59-e93081232823@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0c71240b-ae6a-1233-3a59-e93081232823@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 09:20:56AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 12/11/2017 11:21 PM, Yaowei Bai wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 09:50:03PM -0800, David Rientjes wrote: > >> On Mon, 11 Dec 2017, Yaowei Bai wrote: > >> > >>> This patchset makes some *_is_* like functions return bool because > >>> these functions only use true or false as their return values. > >>> > >>> No functional changes. > > I agree with the idea that predicate-like functions are boolean functions > and should return bool. Then you can use Acked-by to support me. :) > Whether you can get someone to merge the patches is a different subject. The kernel development is not just developing hard codes. The talented guys develop new features and bugfixes, while the other ones do cleanups for them. These two parts of work are all welcome and should be accepted by our community. > > >> I think the concern about this type of patchset in the past is that it is > >> unnecessary churn and makes it more time consuming to research git history > >> without any significant improvement. > > > > While, relative to a modern computer with superb computional power, i > > think the additional time to search git history is negligable and this > > type of patchset is also a good practice for the kernel beginner guys. > > :) > > > -- > ~Randy