linux-kernel - Re: [git-pull -tip] x86: include inverse Xmas tree patches

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]

Message-ID: <49CEA3CD.105@kernel.org>
Date:	Sat, 28 Mar 2009 15:25:17 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...nel.org>
To:	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
CC:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [git-pull -tip] x86: include inverse Xmas tree patches

Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> 
> Ordering include based on length of line minimize the
> risk of merge conflicts.
> If people just add new includes in the bottom of the list you
> are certain that a merge conflit happens.
> 
> This scheme is starting to be used in several places with the
> primary advocates being David Miller and Ingo.
> 
> It is getting used both for includes _and_ for local variables.
> 

Personally I'd prefer alphabetic order, sorting based on length isn't a
complete ordering.  Nearly all editors can sort alphabetically at the
push of a key.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/