On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:48:13PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > There has been some confusion since checkpatch started warning about bool > use in structures, and people have been avoiding using it. > > Many people feel there is still a legitimate place for bool in structures, > so provide some guidance on bool usage derived from the entire thread that > spawned the checkpatch warning.
Hey Jason,
I very much agree that the bool expectations could be much clearer, and this
patch is a nice step in that direction! Just a couple small nitpicks:
> +Do not use bool if cache line layout or size of the value matters, its size
> +and alignment varies based on the compiled architecture. Structures that are
> +optimized for alignment and size should not use bool.
+Do not use bool if cache line layout or size of the value matters, as its size
^
|
Adding an "as" makes the sentence flow a bit cleaner: --------------
> +into a single bitwise 'flags' argument and 'flags' can often a more readable
> +alternative if the call-sites have naked true/false constants.
+into a single bitwise 'flags' argument and 'flags' can often be a more readable
^
|
Missing a "be" here: -----------------------------------------
Ack from me after those two corrections.
Reviewed-by: Joey Pabalinas <[email protected]>
--
Cheers,
Joey Pabalinas
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
