linux-kernel - Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [PATCH] checkpatch: Add comment about updating Documentation/CodingStyle

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:	Mon, 02 Sep 2013 13:04:02 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
CC:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
	ksummit-2013-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2013-discuss] [PATCH] checkpatch: Add comment about
 updating Documentation/CodingStyle

On 09/02/2013 12:50 PM, Josh Triplett wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 11:59:27AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 15:39 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>>> Em Mon, 2 Sep 2013 11:19:01 -0700
>>> Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> escreveu:
>> []
>>>> +# This file does not define the kernel coding style; Documentation/CodingStyle
>>>> +# does.  If you add a new style test to this file, add the corresponding style
>>>> +# rule it enforces to Documentation/CodingStyle.
>>
>>> Agreed with that.
>>
>> I do not.
>>
>>> I would also add another comment there: "in case of
>>> conflicts between checkpatch.pl and Documentation/CodingStyle, the latter
>>> takes precedence."
>>
>> There are many checkpatch rules (like semicolons) that
>> are not in CodingStyle.
>
> It's a rule of thumb, not a mandate.  In *general*, checkpatch.pl should
> not be enforcing style rules that aren't documented in CodingStyle.
>

Oddly enough, the opposite is true as well. 3.1, spaces around binary
and ternary operators, is for example not enforced, presumably because
it would generate too many positives. Since I like that rule, I have
my private version of checkpatch.pl which does check for it. After all,
it _is_ a CodingStyle rule.

Guenter

>> CodingStyle should not become some intensely detailed
>> document that specifies the "only one true way" to
>> write code.
>
> Any rule that maintainers are likely to enforce on patches they review
> should live in Documentation/CodingStyle; unwritten rules are a bad
> idea.  Any rule that maintainers are *not* likely to enforce shouldn't
> go in scripts/checkpatch.pl.
>


--
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/