Re: [PATCH] trivial treewide: Convert dev_set_uevent_suppress argument to bool

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 09/02/2016 08:41 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 13:41 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 09/01/16 17:51, Joe Perches wrote:
On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 00:47 +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
On 09/01/16 13:11, Joe Perches wrote:
Assigning an int to a bitfield:1 can lose precision.
Change the caller argument uses from 1/0 to true/false.
Can you clarify how assigning 0 or 1 to a one-bit bitfield can cause a
loss of precision?
There are no existing defects.
Using 1/0 is not a loss of precision, it's just
changing to use bool avoids potential errors and
promotes consistency.
Other uses of this function already use true/false.
In the patch description you refer to loss of precision. However, your
patch does not address any loss of precision issues. So I think that the
patch description is misleading and could be made more clear.

I tend towards terse being better than verbose.
The original patch description says

"no change to objects"

What would you suggest?

Hello Joe,

How about the following:

dev_set_uevent_suppress() expects a boolean as second argument. Make this clear by passing true/false instead of 1/0 as the second argument.

Bart.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux