From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC693C10F03 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 02:49:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A18CD2070B for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 02:49:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726966AbfCECtE (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2019 21:49:04 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0085.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.85]:40169 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726553AbfCECtD (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2019 21:49:03 -0500 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96096100E86C8; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 02:49:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-HE-Tag: toe73_1469bae26ef47 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2507 Received: from XPS-9350.home (unknown [47.151.153.53]) (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 5 Mar 2019 02:49:00 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] can: m_can: Create a m_can platform framework From: Joe Perches To: Dan Murphy , Wolfgang Grandegger , mkl@pengutronix.de, davem@davemloft.net Cc: linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2019 18:48:58 -0800 In-Reply-To: References: <20190301185043.9037-1-dmurphy@ti.com> <7ffc0639-de4a-87da-68e0-2d170c241824@grandegger.com> <5b0959b9-58b7-cc3c-7014-b7cdb883a7cf@ti.com> <2863c42d-065d-39e8-ed20-8279f76f00ae@grandegger.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" User-Agent: Evolution 3.30.1-1build1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2019-03-04 at 13:12 -0600, Dan Murphy wrote: > On 3/4/19 12:13 PM, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: > > Am 04.03.19 um 18:22 schrieb Dan Murphy: > > > > > + int pm_clock_support; > > > > > > > > A "bool" would be more appropriate, I think. > > > > > > I was abiding by this checkpatch warning I got on the is_peripherial. > > > > > > CHECK: Avoid using bool structure members because of possible alignment issues - see: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/21/384 > > > #94: FILE: drivers/net/can/m_can/m_can.h:94: > > > + bool is_peripherial; > > > > > > > Ah, right! I was also surprised to get that warning. The kernel is full > > of bool's, but well, we should make "checkpatch" happy (and Linus). That check has been removed from checkpatch by commit 7967656ffbfa493f5546c0f18bf8a28f702c4baa Author: Jason Gunthorpe Date: Fri Jan 18 15:50:47 2019 -0700 coding-style: Clarify the expectations around bool There has been some confusion since checkpatch started warning about bool use in structures, and people have been avoiding using it. Many people feel there is still a legitimate place for bool in structures, so provide some guidance on bool usage derived from the entire thread that spawned the checkpatch warning. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CA+55aFwVZk1OfB9T2v014PTAKFhtVan_Zj2dOjnCy3x6E4UJfA@mail.gmail.com