[PATCH 0/2] A generic boolean-type

[PATCH 0/2] A generic boolean-type

[ricknu-0]

Hi

Here is the first "real" patch to make a generic boolean-type.
Andrew, would you please pick this one up?

First patch:
The boolean is named "bool", this because calling it "boolean" seems long (int
and integer) and not "BOOL", because it is a typedef and not a #define.


The patch also defines aliases to 0 and 1, called "false" and "true".
There has been some who do not want the true and false, but since it is just a
value and not bundled with the boolean type, it is up to the programmer which to
use. Also a quick check:

find . -name *.[chS] | xargs grep "define FALSE" | grep -v "FALSE_" | wc -l
55

tells us there seems to be some who like false and true (and a need for a common
definition, as Andrew attemted).


Secound patch:
Just a "cleanup" of files with common definitions of bool/false/true.


These patches has been applied on the current Linus git-tree and compile-tested.

Hopefully, this patch will be picked up by someone and then the real work can
start, converting those files who uses booleans (and/or false/true). This would
most likely occure at kernel-janitors.

Till next time
/Richard Knutsson

PS
If you do not want to be CC'ed, please tell and I will remove your address.
DS

[PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[ricknu-0]

This patch defines:
* a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
* aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"

Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>

---

 stddef.h |    5 +++++
 types.h  |    2 ++
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)


diff --git a/include/linux/stddef.h b/include/linux/stddef.h
index b3a2cad..0382065 100644
--- a/include/linux/stddef.h
+++ b/include/linux/stddef.h
@@ -10,6 +10,11 @@ #else
 #define NULL ((void *)0)
 #endif
 
+enum {
+	false	= 0,
+	true	= 1
+};
+
 #undef offsetof
 #ifdef __compiler_offsetof
 #define offsetof(TYPE,MEMBER) __compiler_offsetof(TYPE,MEMBER)
diff --git a/include/linux/types.h b/include/linux/types.h
index 3f23566..406d4ae 100644
--- a/include/linux/types.h
+++ b/include/linux/types.h
@@ -33,6 +33,8 @@ typedef __kernel_clockid_t	clockid_t;
 typedef __kernel_mqd_t		mqd_t;
 
 #ifdef __KERNEL__
+typedef _Bool			bool;
+
 typedef __kernel_uid32_t	uid_t;
 typedef __kernel_gid32_t	gid_t;
 typedef __kernel_uid16_t        uid16_t;

[PATCH 2/2] drivers: Removes colliding boolean definitions

[ricknu-0]

Removing definitions of bool, false and true, preventing collisions with the
generic definition.

Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>

---

 block/DAC960.h            |    2 +-
 media/video/cpia2/cpia2.h |    4 ----
 net/dgrs.c                |    1 -
 scsi/BusLogic.h           |    5 +----
 4 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)


diff --git a/drivers/block/DAC960.h b/drivers/block/DAC960.h
index a82f37f..f9217c3 100644
--- a/drivers/block/DAC960.h
+++ b/drivers/block/DAC960.h
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ #define DAC690_V2_PciDmaMask	0xfffffffff
   Define a Boolean data type.
 */
 
-typedef enum { false, true } __attribute__ ((packed)) boolean;
+typedef bool boolean;
 
 
 /*
diff --git a/drivers/media/video/cpia2/cpia2.h b/drivers/media/video/cpia2/cpia2.h
index c5ecb2b..8d2dfc1 100644
--- a/drivers/media/video/cpia2/cpia2.h
+++ b/drivers/media/video/cpia2/cpia2.h
@@ -50,10 +50,6 @@ #define CPIA2_PATCH_VER	0
 /***
  * Image defines
  ***/
-#ifndef true
-#define true 1
-#define false 0
-#endif
 
 /*  Misc constants */
 #define ALLOW_CORRUPT 0		/* Causes collater to discard checksum */
diff --git a/drivers/net/dgrs.c b/drivers/net/dgrs.c
index fa4f094..4dbc23d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dgrs.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dgrs.c
@@ -110,7 +110,6 @@ static char version[] __initdata =
  *	DGRS include files
  */
 typedef unsigned char uchar;
-typedef unsigned int bool;
 #define vol volatile
 
 #include "dgrs.h"
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/BusLogic.h b/drivers/scsi/BusLogic.h
index 9792e5a..d6d1d56 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/BusLogic.h
+++ b/drivers/scsi/BusLogic.h
@@ -237,10 +237,7 @@ enum BusLogic_BIOS_DiskGeometryTranslati
   Define a Boolean data type.
 */
 
-typedef enum {
-	false,
-	true
-} PACKED boolean;
+typedef bool boolean;
 
 /*
   Define a 10^18 Statistics Byte Counter data type.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[H. Peter Anvin]

ricknu-0@student.ltu.se wrote:
> This patch defines:
> * a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
> * aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>

Shouldn't this simply use _Bool?

	-hpa

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[ricknu-0]

Citerar "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>:

> ricknu-0@student.ltu.se wrote:
> > This patch defines:
> > * a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
> > * aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
> 
> Shouldn't this simply use _Bool?

Well, it is (now) just a typedef of it. :)

But I find it better, both because it is more similar to the common types:
short, lowlettered words. But also because most editors with highlightning
recognize "bool", but not "_Bool", as a type (as I found it).

> 	-hpa

/Richard Knutsson

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[H. Peter Anvin]

ricknu-0@student.ltu.se wrote:
> Citerar "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>:
> 
>> ricknu-0@student.ltu.se wrote:
>>> This patch defines:
>>> * a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
>>> * aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
>> Shouldn't this simply use _Bool?
> 
> Well, it is (now) just a typedef of it. :)
> 
> But I find it better, both because it is more similar to the common types:
> short, lowlettered words. But also because most editors with highlightning
> recognize "bool", but not "_Bool", as a type (as I found it).
> 

<stdbool.h> should include:

typedef _Bool bool;
#define true  1
#define false 0

There is no enum involved.

	-hpa

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[Jeff Garzik]

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> ricknu-0@student.ltu.se wrote:
>> This patch defines:
>> * a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
>> * aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
> 
> Shouldn't this simply use _Bool?

No sane person should use "_Bool" in real code.  Unnecessary StudlyCaps 
and unnecessary underscore.

"bool" is far easier to type, and looks less weird.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[Jeff Garzik]

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> There is no enum involved.

There should be.  It makes more information available to the C compiler, 
and it makes useful symbols available to the debugger.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[H. Peter Anvin]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> ricknu-0@student.ltu.se wrote:
>>> This patch defines:
>>> * a generic boolean-type, named "bool"
>>> * aliases to 0 and 1, named "false" and "true"
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@student.ltu.se>
>>
>> Shouldn't this simply use _Bool?
> 
> No sane person should use "_Bool" in real code.  Unnecessary StudlyCaps 
> and unnecessary underscore.
> 
> "bool" is far easier to type, and looks less weird.
> 

That wasn't the point.  The point was that bool should be a typedef to 
_Bool instead of an enum.

	-hpa

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[H. Peter Anvin]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> There is no enum involved.
> 
> There should be.  It makes more information available to the C compiler, 
> and it makes useful symbols available to the debugger.
> 

_Bool is a native C type; it has all the information the C compiler needs.

	-hpa

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[Jeff Garzik]

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> That wasn't the point.  The point was that bool should be a typedef to 
> _Bool instead of an enum.

Quoting from the patch to which you are replying:

	+typedef _Bool			bool;

'enum' is only used for defining 'true' and 'false'.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[Jeff Garzik]

H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> There is no enum involved.

>> There should be.  It makes more information available to the C 
>> compiler, and it makes useful symbols available to the debugger.

> _Bool is a native C type; it has all the information the C compiler needs.

"#define true 1" however does not.

	Jeff

Re: [PATCH 1/2] include/linux: Defining bool, false and true

[H. Peter Anvin]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Jeff Garzik wrote:
>>> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>>> There is no enum involved.
> 
>>> There should be.  It makes more information available to the C 
>>> compiler, and it makes useful symbols available to the debugger.
> 
>> _Bool is a native C type; it has all the information the C compiler 
>> needs.
> 
> "#define true 1" however does not.
> 

I guess that's fair, although when you put it into a type _Bool they're 
going to devolve to pure constants.

	-hpa