linux-kernel - Re: sparc: bpf_jit: Rename jump labels in bpf_jit

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, 04 Sep 2016 11:56:58 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
CC:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        Adam Buchbinder <adam.buchbinder@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
Subject: Re: sparc: bpf_jit: Rename jump labels in bpf_jit_compile()

On 09/04/2016 09:20 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/Documentation/CodingStyle?id=865a1caa4b6b886babdd9d67e7c3608be4567a51

[ + Jonathan for above commit in linux-next ]

>> You seem to lack understanding of the difference between absolute
>> requirements and "advice".
>>
>> As Sparc maintainer I can choose to not take this "advice",
>> and I so choose to do so.
>
> Your conclusion can be fine in principle.
>
> I am just curious on how much further software development "fun" the recent update
> by a topic like "CodingStyle: Clarify and complete chapter 7" will trigger.

I don't want to drag this thread onwards for (way) too long, but clearly "it is
advised to indent labels with a single space (not tab)" (from diff in above commit)
doesn't really reflect the majority of kernel practice we have in-tree today and
actually rather adds more confusion than any clarification whatsoever:

   $ git grep -n "^\ [a-z_]*:" -- '*.[ch]' | wc -l
   4919
   $ git grep -n "^[a-z_]*:" -- '*.[ch]' | wc -l
   54686

A CodingStyle document should document what's regarded as a general consensus of
kernel coding practices, and thus should represent the /majority/ of coding style,
which (if I didn't screw up my git-grep line completely) above 9% does not really
reflect at all. So, new folks starting with kernel hacking reading this are rather
misguided, and code-wise it just adds up to have more inconsistencies from new
patches, or worse, have noisy patches (like this one) flying around that try to
brute-force everything into this advice.