linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont

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:   Fri, 16 Dec 2016 11:00:28 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont

On (12/15/16 17:50), Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky
> <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > basically I'm talking about a bunch of 80-cols fixups.
> 
> Please don't.

I was really going to ask "do we still follow the 80 cols rule?" as
the first line in that email, but then I looked into scripts/checkpatch.pl

	my $max_line_length = 80;

and assumed that the rule is still active.

> Nobody uses a vt100 terminal any more. The 80-column wrapping is
> excessive, and makes things like "grep" not work as well.
> 
> No, we still don't want excessively long lines, but that's generally
> mainly because
> 
>  (a) we don't want to have excessively _complicated_ lines
> 
>  (b) we don't want to have excessively deep indentation (so if line
> length is due to 4+ levels of indentation, that's usually the primary
> problem).
> 
>  (c) email quoting gets iffier and uglier, so short lines always are
> preferred if possible
> 
> but in general, aside from those concerns, a long legible line is
> generally preferred over just adding line breaks for the very
> _occasional_ line.

ok. I was 99% sure those 80+ cols lines were not accidental.

> At the 100-column mark you almost have to break, because at that point
> people may start to be actually limited by their displays, but 80
> columns generally isn't it.
> 
> In fact, I thought we already upped the check-patch limit to 100?

I believe someone proposed it at the last kernel summit (or at least
attempted to propose it, but I'm not sure if it was successful).

thanks.

	-ss