Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To:     'Joe Perches' <joe@perches.com>,
        Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com>
CC:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 01/12] regmap-irq: Convert bool bitfields to unsigned
 int
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2 01/12] regmap-irq: Convert bool bitfields to unsigned
 int
Thread-Index: AQHYh9CnysjgLv0l70Wg+yJVLCyDEK1enHCA
Date:   Fri, 24 Jun 2022 14:28:55 +0000
Message-ID: <b9da7e05ce96443cacc1df9b2672eb51@AcuMS.aculab.com>
References: <20220623211420.918875-1-aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com>
         <20220623211420.918875-2-aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com>
         <CAHp75VfTqTfMsrdqyqRj61JAAJ4a_h3rrFriY2d+rrqpVviy=w@mail.gmail.com>
         <YrWqAqGUuy8Z0F3x@sirena.org.uk>
         <4937c0cc9dbc9d06cb626465bd37cbcf76c80a0b.camel@perches.com>
         <Z2ggoG49naOiT1BMxPbsMc2zOjAUEnha@localhost>
 <ca26910886a765dd7edc4815ef90bedbd0f99a95.camel@perches.com>
In-Reply-To: <ca26910886a765dd7edc4815ef90bedbd0f99a95.camel@perches.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Precedence: bulk

From: Joe Perches 
> Sent: 24 June 2022 14:45
...
> I'm trying to show that conversions of bool:1->unsigned int:1
> as being trivial are not so trivial after all.
> 
> It's fairly common to have code like:
> 
> 	[bool] foo.bar = some_value & SETTING;
> 
> where some value is tested for a mask/bit and a non-zero is true.
> 
> So conversions of foo.bar from bool:1 to unsigned int:1 are not
> wise unless all possible side effects are known.

I can never decide whether:
	bool_c = bool_a & bool_b;
can be compiled to a simple 'and' instruction, or requires a
load of instructions in case bool_a and/or bool_b has a non-zero
value without the bottom bit set.

All other C types are cpu register types - so you know what happens.
IMHO bool is an abomination and should not be used :-)

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)