From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41AD3C04EB9 for ; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 10:51:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04C0E20848 for ; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 10:51:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="3dCdXxBi" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 04C0E20848 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726235AbeLCKvc (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Dec 2018 05:51:32 -0500 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:33226 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725907AbeLCKvc (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Dec 2018 05:51:32 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ZRqrzvaSqYPlyr/uF2HAY3yYSZv0lA7oKs8FpC0BNJ0=; b=3dCdXxBi2q65zAlzMuVglLaM0 en6s3VvIzRZb0APZliQG7G18klmVMN35UzzhVRN6MPrezN1DHlh3vMsR4EDYt1ECSw6nG3gKFJAJj n0w6jjXEUWhXyLfPXznxRVU49cZVSmvxhVbwYFr5YSIsdyFp6h9Q3r9h1j0VfgjVzBSoUDR0TIeWv ZidPJ6h97bS5Jg6SGJWg2KJa4/f2/ljDxmZcFnQTOE/ILn19k3oMLdVhUQJByhc3j2bS/FM8WTXuF lsJHgy4tBAbAerTtC+xAPXJEPFFIN6aeXTA6j5wUaZ9JiZ2iF2xmFo8oe3guyyVu1CvxeglSphQS7 i9x9ZZsjw==; Received: from j217100.upc-j.chello.nl ([24.132.217.100] helo=hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gTloM-0006wS-Kw; Mon, 03 Dec 2018 10:50:46 +0000 Received: by hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 26E722029F87F; Mon, 3 Dec 2018 11:50:45 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 11:50:45 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Julia Lawall Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Wen Yang , Davidlohr Bueso , Josh Triplett , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhong.weidong@zte.com.cn, mingo@redhat.com, will.deacon@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] locktorture: Fix assignment of boolean variables Message-ID: <20181203105045.GD11573@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20181201083149.36972-1-wen.yang99@zte.com.cn> <20181201203700.GW4170@linux.ibm.com> <20181203083500.GH11614@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20181203084605.GC11650@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 10:20:42AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > Personally, I would prefer that assignments involving boolean variables > use true or false. It seems more readable. Potentially better for tools > as well. Then those tools are broken per the C spec. > But if the community really prefers 0 and 1, then the test can > be deleted. The C language spec, specifies _Bool as an integer type wide enough to at least store 0 and 1. IOW, 0 and 1 are perfectly valid valus to assign to a _Bool. And fundamentally that has to be so. That's how computers work. 0 is false, 1 is true. The kernel is not the place to try and abstract such stuff, C is our portable assembler. We muck with hardware, we'd better know how the heck it works.