From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 696C32F3600 for ; Wed, 8 Apr 2026 13:18:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775654291; cv=none; b=vGOHb0Ebf8aWkfQm13vJ4iH5HLP1v8xzxuysNV47nuJ00bmb75pMcQG+M/TA32tJmzncb8pakIS4CToqjsNqjJr0bTFVYvABeCi2B4MwtKeEgzD35ZBp61WxV39bu1GWIH7IRUcUZUfLC91I9PoyMlCLmi4XiJGs7yxBBDmsgSg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775654291; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7SK0kkTHPtypRvPwn+R4FkyQQK64OW0uQJbVIzwsTa4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fOdUM39cP4mOJvncfEIJLx2jDfnVBIt0pmZaPdIy+GJ+1+KSk9+VXc7G5VAiQt1N9LEG/vHch9S+ZBGSbhqaqHvQynKOFMPa9Zs9bpmmamQEkDHTpxj/awdjLNUYSoWM46F6l2FmgfnBUREhz5owItH+9VeXFvDApktkoRGnAYA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=aZnMQzXm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="aZnMQzXm" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1775654289; x=1807190289; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=7SK0kkTHPtypRvPwn+R4FkyQQK64OW0uQJbVIzwsTa4=; b=aZnMQzXmPJwQ0qrL/ikI9okTQ5B4hQ9UcAl3O13lGolDOKXNTH2VTNuc v4u+7xr4P2hgjPo4t07r9sRr2HOln4/5TwRr3OTwidTB4sPA4NgPSYlnH Err3ZpsAg26KKz2Xoed2g/IqWf53MZdF6zY6qJSXY9uXobFHx6uHk+cAG AEJJXyfeZeNaK+uaNLLSW/drsn1q9WcC6EHnDTf3KHLB8fFmDkULneorx g8UtP9/cRB6gTyKx/oYLDPvx0lO7mRuFkkhGA/t7K1yNq4CfTmQIJFOo8 xS8jl3sFIHvQwS7DCko/bM6CYhfM5IWryvoF+cmjNAALYHBgJP9AUxnnR Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: fkipKiyoSniH+aAXfp/pdw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: M7fq1aClTi2NqvNl2fc6Yg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11753"; a="76707637" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,167,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="76707637" Received: from fmviesa002.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.142]) by fmvoesa108.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Apr 2026 06:18:08 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: RlMnETFRSgim22dEVb8YDw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: dEGE1567RnG6DYjc4hc/tQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.23,167,1770624000"; d="scan'208";a="251613354" Received: from vpanait-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.72]) by fmviesa002-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Apr 2026 06:18:07 -0700 Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2026 16:18:04 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Petr Mladek Cc: Thorsten Blum , Andrew Morton , Steven Rostedt , Rasmus Villemoes , Sergey Senozhatsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/vsprintf: use bool for local decode variable Message-ID: References: <20260407181835.1053072-2-thorsten.blum@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Wed, Apr 08, 2026 at 09:53:35AM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Tue 2026-04-07 20:18:36, Thorsten Blum wrote: ... > I have mixed feeling about this patch Same here. > I agree that it might slightly > improve code readability. But cosmetic changes are usually about > personal preferences and often just pollute code history. > > IMHO, this is really just about "code readability" vs "code history > pollution" problem. I believe that compilers would handle both variants > the same way. > > As I said, I agree that this this slightly improves the code > readability and it is trivial. So I am going to wait few more > days and take this patch unless there is a strong push back > from others. Up to you, no pushback from me, and no tag as well. Personally I consider it's a churn, but we have tons of a such in the kernel (I mean int as boolean cases). -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko