linux-kernel - Re: + softirq-cleanup-preempt-check.patch added to -mm tree

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:	Sat, 09 Oct 2010 18:15:27 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: + softirq-cleanup-preempt-check.patch added to -mm tree

On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 23:04 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >> +static inline void softirq_preempt_check(struct softirq_action *h,
> >> +            int prev_count)
> > 
> > unnecessary linebreak.
> 
> How unnecessary is this linebreak:
> $ wc -c
> static inline void softirq_preempt_check(struct softirq_action *h, int
> prev_count)
> 83
> 
> People, including me, still work with 80-col terminals. What I can
> tolerate are undivided strings, because it sucks if one cannot grep for
> anything from the log 

I actually work on ~350 character wide terminals, but then, I vert-split
it 4-ways so I end up with ~85 chars per column.. :-)

But I agree the line should be split, I however much prefer the form:

static inline
void softirq_preempt_check(struct softirq_action *h, int prev_count)


--
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/