From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751183AbWGUVOU (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:14:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751178AbWGUVOU (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:14:20 -0400 Received: from srv5.dvmed.net ([207.36.208.214]:53721 "EHLO mail.dvmed.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751183AbWGUVOT (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:14:19 -0400 Message-ID: <44C1439C.20905@garzik.org> Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 17:14:04 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (X11/20060614) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michael Buesch CC: Jan Engelhardt , ricknu-0@student.ltu.se, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Alexey Dobriyan , Vadim Lobanov , Shorty Porty , Peter Williams Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 2) References: <1153341500.44be983ca1407@portal.student.luth.se> <1153445087.44c02cdf40511@portal.student.luth.se> <200607212027.37823.mb@bu3sch.de> In-Reply-To: <200607212027.37823.mb@bu3sch.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -4.3 (----) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.1.3 on srv5.dvmed.net summary: Content analysis details: (-4.3 points, 5.0 required) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Michael Buesch wrote: > On Friday 21 July 2006 16:23, Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>> The changes are: >>> * u2 has been corrected to u1 (and also added it as __u1) >> Do we really need this? Is not 'bool' enough? > > I would say we don't even _want_ this. > A u1 variable will basically never be one bit wide. > It will be at least 8bit, or let's say 32bit. Maybe > even 64bit on some archs. It all depends on the compiler > plus the arch. > > We _don't_ want u1, because we don't get what we see. For this and 1000 other reasons, we don't want u1. Jeff