Re: [patch -next] x86: dubious one-bit signed bitfields

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 12/06/2011 11:58 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 
> Sure.  Bool takes one byte, so it would be: bool
> sig_on_uaccess_error:1; bool			uaccess_err:1;  /* uaccess failed
> */
> 
> The __u8 types mean that we're trying to not polute the posix 
> namespace?  Does that affect bool?  I'm not sure the rules with
> that.
> 

If these headers are exported to userspace it might be unsuitable, and
yes, better mark them "unsigned".  If they are kernel-only it doesn't
matter.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux