linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH trivial] include/linux/gfp.h: Improve the coding styles

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 28 Feb 2016 00:14:19 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To:	Chen Gang <chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn>
cc:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jianyu Zhan <nasa4836@...il.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, rientjes@...gle.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, vdavydov@...tuozzo.com,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH trivial] include/linux/gfp.h: Improve the coding styles

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016, Chen Gang wrote:

> > Mel, as an MM developer, has already NACK'ed the patch, which means
> > you should not send the patch to **any** upstream maintainer for
> > inclusion.
> 
> I don't think I "should not ...". I only care about correctness and
> contribution, I don't care about any members ideas and their thinking.
> When we have different ideas or thinking, we need discuss.

If by "discuss" you mean "30+ email thread about where to put a line 
break", please drop me from CC next time this discussion is going to 
happen. Thanks.

> For common shared header files, for me, we should really take more care
> about the coding styles.
> 
>  - If the common shared header files don't care about the coding styles,
>    I guess any body files will have much more excuses for "do not care
>    about coding styles".
> 
>  - That means our kernel whole source files need not care about coding
>    styles at all!!
> 
>  - It is really really VERY BAD!!
> 
> If someone only dislike me to send the related patches, I suggest: Let
> another member(s) "run checkpatch -file" on the whole "./include" sub-
> directory, and fix all coding styles issues.

Which is exactly what you shouldn't do.

The ultimate goal of the Linux kernel is not 100% strict complicance to 
the CodingStyle document no matter what. The ultimate goal is to have a 
kernel that is under control. By polluting git blame, you are taking on 
aspect of the "under control" away.

Common sense needs to be used; horribly terrible coding style needs to be 
fixed, sure. Is 82-characters long line horribly terrible coding style? 
No, it's not.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs