linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ptrace: checkpatch fixes

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: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0904081341090.4583@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Wed, 8 Apr 2009 13:44:23 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
cc:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ptrace: checkpatch fixes

On Wed, 8 Apr 2009, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> 
> Isnt checkpatch just following what is written down in the Documentation 
> folder? Maybe adopting the following part of CodingStyle and add more 
> examples for good and bad would give the checkpatch authors a better 
> idea about your intent.

The thing is, it's true that it's good if things fit in 80 columns.

But _splitting_ lines isn't the answer. Making code simpler is, but 
somehow the 80-column warning never causes that to happen - instead people 
just split.

And yes, I guess we should remove the language saying so. It's not from 
my original coding stule, it was added later by others, and came through 
Andrew (commit 560362dafe4de60db70f2c298a53f4613453a78b: "[PATCH] 
Codingstyle update" in the historical Linux archive).

			Linus
--
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/