On Sat, Jan 03, 2015 at 11:20:29PM -0500, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 18:54:00 -0500, John de la Garza said:
>
> > It should not be assumed that true will always be 1 as defined in
> > include/linux/stddef.h, right?
>
> No, I mean use an actual 'bool' type rather than 'int'. Consider this from
> kernel/softirq.c:
yes, bool has two possible values true and false
from include/linux/stddef.h:
enum {
false = 0,
true = 1
};
I assume it is a bad idea to depend on true being 1, right? I mean, I
should assume that true could be changed to any non 0 value in the future,
right?
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
