Re: [PATCH 02/10] x86, asm: use bool for bitops and other assembly outputs

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Wed Jun 08 2016 - 03:50:17 EST


On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 04:31:01PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> The gcc people have confirmed that using "bool" when combined with
> inline assembly always is treated as a byte-sized operand that can be
> assumed to be 0 or 1, which is exactly what the SET instruction
> emits. Change the output types and intermediate variables of as many
> operations as practical to "bool".
>
> Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/boot/bitops.h | 8 +++++---
> arch/x86/boot/boot.h | 8 ++++----
> arch/x86/boot/string.c | 2 +-
> arch/x86/include/asm/apm.h | 6 +++---
> arch/x86/include/asm/archrandom.h | 16 ++++++++--------
> arch/x86/include/asm/atomic.h | 8 ++++----
> arch/x86/include/asm/atomic64_64.h | 10 +++++-----
> arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h | 28 ++++++++++++++--------------
> arch/x86/include/asm/local.h | 8 ++++----
> arch/x86/include/asm/percpu.h | 8 ++++----
> arch/x86/include/asm/rmwcc.h | 4 ++--
> arch/x86/include/asm/rwsem.h | 17 +++++++++--------
> include/linux/random.h | 12 ++++++------
> 13 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 66 deletions(-)

So the only concern I have with this is that the x86 function signatures
are now different from the other architectures.

Not sure how much if anything that matters..