[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 03/11] vfs: Don't allow overwriting mounts in the current mount namespace
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Eric W. Biederman
<> wrote:
>> Minor nit: return value of any is_* function is either true or false, so why not
>> declare it bool?
> Because I am working on the core of the kernel and C compilers do weird
> things with bool variables (storing them in bytes...). I expected a
> type that the C compiler does not do weird things with would be more
> readily received on a path whose performance people are interested in.

Yeah, I have to say that I'm not a huge fan of "bool". It has some odd
properties, especially in memory (ie as a structure member).

For this kind of function return value it actually tends to work very
well, and in fact often generates slightly better code than "int". So
I don't _hate_ bool, and we've certainly had a lot more use creep in
lately, but I also don't really see "bool" as much of an upside.


 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-19 15:41    [W:0.155 / U:3.308 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site