On 30/11/16 13:58, Paul Durrant wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrew Cooper [mailto:andrew.coop...@citrix.com] >> Sent: 30 November 2016 13:50 >> To: Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org> >> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>; Jan Beulich >> <jbeul...@suse.com>; Paul Durrant <paul.durr...@citrix.com> >> Subject: [PATCH v3 07/24] x86/emul: Clean up the naming of the retire union >> >> Rename byte to raw, as the field being a single byte long is an >> implementation >> detail. Make the bitfields part of an anonymous struct to remove the .flags >> qualifier. Change the types of the flags to being booleans, to match their >> use. >> > Is it legitimate to use a bool in a bitfield?
Yes. Why wouldn't it be? > Also, anonymous unions are not part of C99 AFAIK... are we now stipulating > something more recent? We used gnu99 for as long as I can remember, and we have other examples of this pattern already in Xen. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
