From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0150.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4E0370 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 09:43:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by smtpgrave01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C773318046D9B for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 08:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omf04.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 285BFDB5C; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 08:26:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [HIDDEN] (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id AD175D1516; Fri, 4 Jun 2021 08:26:31 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <19651be0dc8706da34658d25195ff122f41ee7c0.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [greybus-dev] [PATCH] staging: greybus: fixed the coding style, labels should not be indented. From: Joe Perches To: David Laight , 'Alex Elder' , 'Manikishan Ghantasala' , Alex Elder Cc: Alex Elder , "greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org" , "linux-staging@lists.linux.dev" , Johan Hovold , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2021 01:26:30 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <20210602133659.46158-1-manikishanghantasala@gmail.com> <9a3878fd-3b59-76f5-ddc7-625c66f9fee8@ieee.org> <792dd57c0ef8454497e5ae4c4534dea2@AcuMS.aculab.com> <10ad30e2-c906-b210-bf0e-5e20b6de1993@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" User-Agent: Evolution 3.38.1-1 X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspamout01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AD175D1516 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.77 X-Stat-Signature: wjdyupwsx14pw579haxy5xkypixm9osy X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Session-ID: U2FsdGVkX19fS19ixJkOAeDle8y0KO0ufAQmRER3gi0= X-HE-Tag: 1622795191-465470 On Fri, 2021-06-04 at 08:13 +0000, David Laight wrote: > From: Alex Elder > > Sent: 03 June 2021 22:55 > ... > > Not necessarily, sizeof(bool) is implementation defined. > > And I thought you didn't think the size of the structure > > was very important... > > It is 'implementation defined' but will be 32 bits on everything > except an old 32bit ARM ABI. Really? (x86-64) $ gcc -x c - #include #include struct foo { _Bool b; }; int main(int argc, char **argv) { printf("sizeof _Bool: %zu\n", sizeof(_Bool)); printf("sizeof struct foo: %zu\n", sizeof(struct foo)); return 0; } $ ./a.out sizeof _Bool: 1 sizeof struct foo: 1