From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: liguang <lig.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@gmail.com>,
Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] sys/reboot: boolize C_A_D
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 16:02:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130531160259.553761ddeb6095d22e8cea0d@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369900686-5936-3-git-send-email-lig.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, 30 May 2013 15:58:05 +0800 liguang <lig.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> --- a/include/linux/reboot.h
> +++ b/include/linux/reboot.h
> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ extern void kernel_restart(char *cmd);
> extern void kernel_halt(void);
> extern void kernel_power_off(void);
>
> -extern int C_A_D; /* for sysctl */
> +extern bool C_A_D; /* for sysctl */
> void ctrl_alt_del(void);
This means that the pointer in kernel/sysctl.c:kern_table.data now
points at a bool but is declared to have size sizeof(int).
That happens to work with current gcc verions, but there's no rule
which states that sizeof(bool) must equal sizeof(int).
And I'm not sure that changing kern_table to use sizeof(bool) is really
worth all the bother.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-31 23:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-30 7:58 [PATCH 1/4] sys: remove unnecesscary parameter of set_one_prio liguang
2013-05-30 7:58 ` [PATCH 2/4] sys: remove kernel_shutdown_prepare's parameter liguang
2013-05-31 22:58 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-30 7:58 ` [PATCH 3/4] sys/reboot: boolize C_A_D liguang
2013-05-31 23:02 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2013-06-03 0:25 ` li guang
2013-06-03 1:09 ` Joe Perches
2013-05-30 7:58 ` [PATCH 4/4] sys: fix malformed panic massage of reboot liguang
2013-05-30 8:08 ` [PATCH 1/4] sys: remove unnecesscary parameter of set_one_prio Joe Perches
2013-05-31 23:07 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-31 22:53 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130531160259.553761ddeb6095d22e8cea0d@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@openvz.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=lig.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®