On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 06:31:09PM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote:
> On 11-Dec-18 18:22, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:59:25AM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote:
> >
> >> diff --git a/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> >> index 85021451eee0..499d96302262 100644
> >> +++ b/include/rdma/ib_verbs.h
> >> @@ -2374,6 +2374,7 @@ struct ib_device {
> >> int (*dealloc_pd)(struct ib_pd *pd);
> >> struct ib_ah * (*create_ah)(struct ib_pd *pd,
> >> struct rdma_ah_attr *ah_attr,
> >> + bool sleepable,
> >> struct ib_udata *udata);
> >
> > I think the Linux style consensus here is that these should be a flag with a
> > enum name not a bool
>
> Will change.
> I'm familiar with the no bool fields in structs
> (https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/384), good to know it applies to function
> parameters as well.
I think it is under the rational that
foo(true)
tells the user nothing, while
foo(DO_SOMETHING)
Should be more informative
Same argument applies to 'int' pretending to be bool
At least a struct member has a name..
Jason
