Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:42:31 +0200 | From | Richard Knutsson <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm2] fs/jfs: Conversion to generic boolean |
| |
Dave Kleikamp wrote:
>On Sat, 2006-08-26 at 19:37 +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote: > > >>From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se> >> >>Conversion of booleans to: generic-boolean.patch (2006-08-23) >> >>Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se> >> >>--- >> >>Compile-tested >> >> >> inode.c | 2 +- >> jfs_dmap.c | 12 ++++++------ >> jfs_extent.c | 14 +++++++------- >> jfs_extent.h | 4 ++-- >> jfs_imap.c | 26 +++++++++++++------------- >> jfs_imap.h | 4 ++-- >> jfs_metapage.h | 4 ++-- >> jfs_txnmgr.c | 16 ++++++++-------- >> jfs_types.h | 4 ---- >> jfs_xtree.c | 2 +- >> xattr.c | 10 +++++----- >> 11 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) >> >> > > > >>>>original patch removed <<< >>>> >>>> > >Richard, >Here's a version of the patch with completely removes any boolean types >and constants: > >JFS: Conversion of boolean to int > > <patch removed>
Just why is it, that when there is a change to make locally defined booleans into a more generic one, it is converted into integers? ;) But seriously, what is gained by removing them, other then less understandable code? (Not talking about FALSE -> 0, but boolean_t -> int)
I can understand if authors disprove making an integer into a boolean, but here it already were booleans. But hey, you are the maintainer ;)
Richard Knutsson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |