Thread (7 messages) 7 messages, 4 authors, 2019-01-14

Re: [PATCH v4] coding-style: Clarify the expectations around bool

From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Date: 2019-01-13 16:49:46
Also in: linux-doc, linux-rdma, lkml

On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:48:13PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
+The Linux kernel bool type is an alias for the C99 _Bool type. bool values can
+only evaluate to 0 or 1, and implicit or explicit conversion to bool
+automatically converts the value to true or false. When using bool types the
+!! construction is not needed, which eliminates a class of bugs.
+
+When working with bool values the true and false definitions should be used
+instead of 0 and 1.
+
+bool function return types and stack variables are always fine to use whenever
+appropriate. Use of bool is encouraged to improve readability and is often a
+better option than 'int' for storing boolean values.
It's awkward to start a sentence with a lower case letter.  How about
rephrasing this paragraph and the following one as:

  Using bool as the return type of a function or as a variable is always
  fine when appropriate.  It often improves readability and is a better option
  than int for storing boolean values.  Using bool in data structures is
  more debatable; its size and alignment can vary between architectures.
+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.
+
+If a structure has many true/false values, consider consolidating them into a
+bitfield with 1 bit members, or using an appropriate fixed width type, such as
+u8.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help