On 31/10/19 07:57, SAURAV GIREPUNJE wrote: > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 04:44:23PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 07:12:46PM +0530, SAURAV GIREPUNJE wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:13:00AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 03:11:04PM +0530, Saurav Girepunje wrote: >>>>> Use true/false for bool type "dbg" in mmu.c >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Saurav Girepunje <saurav.girepunje@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 2 +- >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c >>>>> index 24c23c66b226..c0b1df69ce0f 100644 >>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c >>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c >>>>> @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ enum { >>>>> #undef MMU_DEBUG >>>>> >>>>> #ifdef MMU_DEBUG >>>>> -static bool dbg = 0; >>>>> +static bool dbg = true; >>>> >>>> You're actually changing the value from false to true. Please, if you >>>> don't know C, don't touch things. >>> Hi, >>> >>> Thanks for your review. >>> I accept that I have given wrong value "true" to debug variable. It's my bad my typo mistake. >>> I will make sure that I will not touch your exclusive C code where we can assign 0/1 to a bool variable, >>> As you have given me a free advice, I also request you to please don't review such small patches from newbie to discourage them. >> >> I will most certainly review whatever I want, and clearly it is needed. > Do you want me to discard this patch or resend ? > Hi Saurav, In general I would be happy with replacing 0/1 with false/true, but not in this particular case. Despite working on KVM for quite some time I have never found MMU_DEBUG particularly useful, therefore it is going to go away soon and will be replaced with kernel tracepoints; see for example commit 335e192a3fa4 ("KVM: x86: add tracepoints around __direct_map and FNAME(fetch)", 2019-07-05). Therefore, even such a simple change would be very short lived. Regarding this patch, I for one am happy that Peter caught the problem in your patch. His message was perhaps blunt but also honest; contributing to the kernel requires a very good discipline. I don't want to discourage you from contributing, but I suggest that you look into how you developed the patch (from the idea down to sending it) and figure out how your mistake managed to slip. Thanks, Paolo