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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:00:56 -0400 (EDT) From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca> To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: [PATCH] Documentation/CodingStyle: Numerous pedantic cleanups, nothing major. Signed-off-by: Robert P. J. Day <rpjday@...shcourse.ca> --- while i was perusing CodingStyle, i did some tidying up along the way. i won't take it personally if someone decides not to bother with this, it's all pretty minor. this is all independent of the earlier macro explanation. diff --git a/Documentation/CodingStyle b/Documentation/CodingStyle index cb9258b..7544702 100644 --- a/Documentation/CodingStyle +++ b/Documentation/CodingStyle @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ Linux kernel coding style This is a short document describing the preferred coding style for the -linux kernel. Coding style is very personal, and I won't _force_ my +Linux kernel. Coding style is very personal, and I won't _force_ my views on anybody, but this is what goes for anything that I have to be able to maintain, and I'd prefer it for most other things too. Please at least consider the points made here. @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ Anyway, here goes: Chapter 1: Indentation Tabs are 8 characters, and thus indentations are also 8 characters. -There are heretic movements that try to make indentations 4 (or even 2!) +There are heretical movements that try to make indentations 4 (or even 2!) characters deep, and that is akin to trying to define the value of PI to be 3. @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix your program. In short, 8-char indents make things easier to read, and have the added -benefit of warning you when you're nesting your functions too deep. +benefit of warning you when you're nesting your functions too deeply. Heed that warning. The preferred way to ease multiple indentation levels in a switch statement is @@ -122,14 +122,14 @@ opening brace at the beginning of the next line, thus: body of function } -Heretic people all over the world have claimed that this inconsistency +Heretical people all over the world have claimed that this inconsistency is ... well ... inconsistent, but all right-thinking people know that (a) K&R are _right_ and (b) K&R are right. Besides, functions are special anyway (you can't nest them in C). Note that the closing brace is empty on a line of its own, _except_ in -the cases where it is followed by a continuation of the same statement, -ie a "while" in a do-statement or an "else" in an if-statement, like +the cases where it is followed by a continuation of the same statement; +ie, a "while" in a do-statement or an "else" in an if-statement, like this: do { @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ Rationale: K&R. Also, note that this brace-placement also minimizes the number of empty (or almost empty) lines, without any loss of readability. Thus, as the -supply of new-lines on your screen is not a renewable resource (think +supply of newlines on your screen is not a renewable resource (think 25-line terminal screens here), you have more empty lines to put comments on. @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ Maybe there are other cases too, but the rule should basically be to NEVER EVER use a typedef unless you can clearly match one of those rules. In general, a pointer, or a struct that has elements that can reasonably -be directly accessed should _never_ be a typedef. +be directly accessed, should _never_ be a typedef. Chapter 6: Functions @@ -386,7 +386,8 @@ because it is a simple way to add valuable information for the reader. Chapter 7: Centralized exiting of functions Albeit deprecated by some people, the equivalent of the goto statement is -used frequently by compilers in form of the unconditional jump instruction. +used frequently by compilers in the form of the unconditional jump +instruction. The goto statement comes in handy when a function exits from multiple locations and some common work such as cleanup has to be done. @@ -420,6 +421,7 @@ out: return result; } + Chapter 8: Commenting Comments are good, but there is also a danger of over-commenting. NEVER @@ -501,7 +503,7 @@ values. To do the latter, you can stick the following in your .emacs file: (setq indent-tabs-mode t) (c-set-style "linux-tabs-only"))))) -This will make emacs go better with the kernel coding style for C +This will make emacs work better with the kernel coding style for C files below ~/src/linux-trees. But even if you fail in getting emacs to do sane formatting, not @@ -713,7 +715,7 @@ that can go into these 5 milliseconds. A reasonable rule of thumb is to not put inline at functions that have more than 3 lines of code in them. An exception to this rule are the cases where -a parameter is known to be a compiletime constant, and as a result of this +a parameter is known to be a compile-time constant, and as a result of this constantness you *know* the compiler will be able to optimize most of your function away at compile time. For a good example of this later case, see the kmalloc() inline function. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday LinkedIn: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/rpjday ======================================================================== -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists