Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean (version 6)

From: ricknu-0
Date: Wed Jul 26 2006 - 23:30:00 EST

Citerar Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx>:

> Fun stuff to do in the future:
> Convert test_bit() and various other test_*() and
> atomic_*() operators to return bool.
> Convert many TRUE/FALSE to true/false, in a patch of
> similar size to Andrew's March 2006 patch entitled:
> "[patch 1/1] consolidate TRUE and FALSE".
> Convert a variety of spellings of BOOLEAN to "bool".
> Convert routines and variables using the old C
> convention of int/0/1 for boolean to the
> new bool/false/true.
> How do we detect breakage that results from converting
> an apparent boolean to these values, when the
> code actually worked by using more than just
> values 0 and 1 for the variable in question?
> How do we detect any breakage caused by possible changes
> in the sizeof variables whose type we changed?
> Various sparse and/or gcc checks that benefit from
> knowing the additional constraints on bool types.

Well... that's some work to be done :)

Will save the list and try to mark it of along the road.

> Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> 1.925.600.0401

/Richard Knutsson
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at