Thanks Steve,

On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 at 21:53, Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
...
> > --- a/include/linux/trace_remote_event.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/trace_remote_event.h
> > @@ -3,6 +3,8 @@
> >  #ifndef _LINUX_TRACE_REMOTE_EVENTS_H
> >  #define _LINUX_TRACE_REMOTE_EVENTS_H
> >
> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > +
> >  struct trace_remote;
> >  struct trace_event_fields;
> >  struct trace_seq;
>
> My ack still stands, but I wonder if we should just not use the include and
> instead s/bool/_Bool/ ?

I'd prefer to keep the include, if you don't mind.

As far as I can tell, apart from the typedef itself, the only headers
built into the kernel that use _Bool as a type are a uapi one and
arch/um's user.h when it's built for the host, neither of which has
bool available, plus what looks like a leftover in bcache_ondisk.h
from when it was uapi.

The include also covers whatever field gets added next.

Happy to switch if you'd still prefer _Bool.

Cheers,
/fuad

>
> -- Steve

Reply via email to