From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:04:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <45D5F21B.2010804@student.ltu.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1171644132.3443.27.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com>
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
>
Have been some work done already. Has there been any problems?
> 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.
>
It is a fundamental difference between an integer and a boolean. Have
you seen anyone trying to do "bool var = true + true;"? ;)
> 3. Having a different, special, type for single bit bitfields (while
> still using u<n> for multi bit bitfields) is asking for confusion, and
> hence trouble at the driver level.
>
I don't think a boolean should be view as a single bit bitfield. Ex:
u8 a:1;
...
int b = 4 + a;
is obviously not a boolean, while:
u8 a:1;
...
if (a)
is, and a should be "bool a:1;" (imho)
Richard Knutsson
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-16 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-10 17:46 [PATCH] drivers/scsi/aic7xxx_old: Convert to generic boolean-values Richard Knutsson
2007-02-10 18:27 ` James Bottomley
2007-02-10 20:35 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-10 20:43 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-12 20:27 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-16 16:42 ` James Bottomley
2007-02-16 18:04 ` Richard Knutsson [this message]
2007-02-16 18:23 ` James Bottomley
2007-02-16 19:10 ` Richard Knutsson
2007-02-16 18:34 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-16 18:42 ` James Bottomley
2007-02-16 18:50 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-16 21:43 ` Doug Ledford
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=45D5F21B.2010804@student.ltu.se \
--to=ricknu-0@student.ltu.se \
--cc=James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox