linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/4] ipc,shm: minor cleanups

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: <1398360099.2744.8.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:21:39 -0700
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
To:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Cc:	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	gthelen@...gle.com, aswin@...com, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/4] ipc,shm: minor cleanups

On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 07:18 +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 04/23/2014 07:25 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 07:07 +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> >> On 04/23/2014 04:53 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >>> -  Breakup long function names/args.
> >>> -  Cleaup variable declaration.
> >>> -  s/current->mm/mm
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
> >>> ---
> >>>  ipc/shm.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> >>>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/ipc/shm.c b/ipc/shm.c
> >>> index f000696..584d02e 100644
> >>> --- a/ipc/shm.c
> >>> +++ b/ipc/shm.c
> >>> @@ -480,15 +480,13 @@ static const struct vm_operations_struct shm_vm_ops = {
> >>>  static int newseg(struct ipc_namespace *ns, struct ipc_params *params)
> >>>  {
> >>>  	key_t key = params->key;
> >>> -	int shmflg = params->flg;
> >>> +	int id, error, shmflg = params->flg;
> >>
> >> It's largely a matter of taste (and I may be in a minority), and I know
> >> there's certainly precedent in the kernel code, but I don't much like the 
> >> style of mixing variable declarations that have initializers, with other
> >> unrelated declarations (e.g., variables without initializers). What is 
> >> the gain? One less line of text? That's (IMO) more than offset by the 
> >> small loss of readability.
> > 
> > Yes, it's taste. And yes, your in the minority, at least in many core
> > kernel components and ipc.
> 
> Davidlohr,
> 
> So, noting that the minority is less small than we thought, I'll just
> add this: I'd have appreciated it if your reply had been less 
> dismissive, and you'd actually responded to my concrete point about 
> loss of readability.

Apologies, I didn't mean to sound dismissive. It's just that I don't
like arguing over this kind of things. The idea of the cleanups wasn't
"lets remove LoC", but more "lets make the style suck less" -- and
believe me, ipc code is pretty darn ugly wrt. Over the last few months
we've improved it some, but still so much horror. The changes I make are
aligned with the general coding style we have in the rest of the kernel,
but yes, ultimately it comes down to taste.

Anyway, I am in favor of single line declarations with initializers
which are *meaningful*. The variables I moved around are not.

Thanks,
Davidlohr

--
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/