linux-kernel - Re: staging: ks7010: Rename jump labels

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:	Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:55:55 +0200
From:	"SF Markus Elfring" <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	"Jean Delvare" <jdelvare@...e.de>
Cc:	"Wolfram Sang" <wsa@...-dreams.de>, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Julia Lawall" <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: staging: ks7010: Rename jump labels

> > How do you think about information from the chapter "7: Centralized exiting of functions"?
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/CodingStyle?id=47ef4ad2684d380dd6d596140fb79395115c3950#n389
> 
> I'm not impressed by this piece of documentation.

I would also appreciate further improvements there.


> Back to the lack of space before labels, it's at best a personal preference.
> If you insist on standardizing, I'd call it a bug in the documentation,
> which should be fixed. One space before label is the way to go.

Would you like to contribute another patch for such a coding style issue?


> That being said... checkpatch does not complain about leading space
> before labels. Not even with --strict. So why are you mentioning it here?

How do you think about a similar software update?

staging: lustre: Fix a jump label position in osc_get_info()
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c71d264543f759fea147734cb63de36397817534
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/12/21/401


> Just looking at the thread on lkml makes me feel dizzy.

I understand your concern to some degree.


> When you are about to send that amount of messages,
> you should pause and think again.

This happened already.


> Is it really worth it?

I came to such a conclusion for the shown source code clean-up.
Some software developers can also support it.


> I think I'd be less annoyed by regular spam.

It can be harder occasionally to become familiar and comfortable with
the suggested change pattern.
Could you accept other details from my update suggestion?

Regards,
Markus