On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 05:01:39PM +0100, Federico Vaga wrote:

quoted

-17) Don't re-invent the kernel macros
+17) Using bool
+--------------
+
+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.

A very minor thing. I would suggest to keep consistent, in the
statement, the mapping between definitions ("true and false [...]")
and their correspondent integer values ("[...] instead of 1 and 0").

In few words, I propose to change "0 and 1" into "1 and 0".

Hm, sure, seems harmless

quoted

+Similarly for function arguments, many true/false values can be
consolidated
+into a single bitwise 'flags' argument and 'flags' can often a more
readable
+alternative if the call-sites have naked true/false constants.

Of course, English is not my primary language, but it looks to me
that here a "be" is missing: "[...] and 'flags' can often a more
readable alternative [...]".

yes, sthanks
 

quoted

+Otherwise limited use of bool in structures and arguments can improve
+readability.

I'm going to update the Italian translations for this. Do you want
me to contribute directly to this patch? Otherwise I will send a
dedicated patch later when this one get accepted.

 
I think you should send it as an update I guess? I don't really know
the process for translations

Jason