On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 04:12:01PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 05/12/19(Thu) 11:57, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 12:38:34PM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> >
> > > ok?
> >
> > I'm no kernel hacker but I really do not see the point.
>
> Most of the kernel doesn't use any type for boolean. The exception is
> UVM which uses its own boolean_t. This type is inconsistently used in
> some pmap(9) functions as well.
>
> I'm well aware of the arguments in favor of a boolean type as well as
> the arguments against. I'm not taking any position, I'm striving for
> coherency.
>
> On top of that, reducing the dependencies between the UVM and pmap
> layers help to draw a line. That's what I'm after.
>
I grepped the kernel tree and see that uvm and the various pmap
subdirs are indeed the odd ones out. So go ahead, I'll go back to
userland grumbling about the many examples of wrong boolean usage in
mg ;-)
-Otto
