On April 30, 2025 12:58:35 AM PDT, "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Tue, 29 Apr 2025, Derek J. Clark wrote: > >> >> >> On April 28, 2025 9:39:55 PM PDT, ALOK TIWARI <alok.a.tiwari@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > >> >On 28-04-2025 06:48, Derek J. Clark wrote: >> >> + * Determine if the extreme thermal mode is supported by the hardware. >> >> + * Anything version 5 or lower does not. For devices wuth a version 6 or >> > >> >typo wuth >> > >> >> + * greater do a DMI check, as some devices report a version that supports >> >> + * extreme mode but have an incomplete entry in the BIOS. To ensure this >> >> + * cannot be set, quirk them to prevent assignment. >> >> + * >> >> + * Return: int. >> > >> >The function returns int. >> >But logically it's returning boolean false, true >> >> I may have overdone it by removing all bools after the v5 review as I >> interpreted Ilpo's comment to mean I shouldn't return any bool c types. >> I'll wait for them to weigh in before changing this back. > >Hi Derek, > >That is certainly a misinterpretation. > >It's perfectly fine to return bool from a function. If there's no good >reason e.g. because of some API that requires int return, booleans should >be returned as bool. > >I was trying to say your kerneldoc said "Return: bool" for a function that >returns int. Both "bool" and "int" are C types so there was a contradition >in that, which is what I tried to point out. Please write "boolean" if you >refer to a boolean which is not "bool" typed (but consider what was said >above and if the type too can be changed to bool in that case). > Okay, that makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. - Derek
