Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Feb 2014 14:20:29 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 03/11] vfs: Don't allow overwriting mounts in the current mount namespace | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> 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.
Linus
| |