linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: ubi: Extend UBI layer debug/messaging capabilities

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:	Fri, 3 Oct 2014 18:31:21 +0200
From:	Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
To:	Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
Cc:	Tanya Brokhman <tlinder@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: ubi: Extend UBI layer debug/messaging capabilities

On 3 October 2014 18:19, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-10-03 at 17:50 +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> On 3 October 2014 17:27, Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com> wrote:
>> > Yes, I guess a single patch is indeed OK. I have few nit-picks, though.
>> >
>> > On Tue, 2014-09-30 at 18:13 +0300, Tanya Brokhman wrote:
>> >> -             ubi_err("'ubi_io_read_ec_hdr()' returned unknown code %d", err);
>> >> +             ubi_err(ubi,
>> >> +               "'ubi_io_read_ec_hdr()' returned unknown code %d", err);
>> >>               return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> > I think it is fine if the line is long in these cases, let's keep the
>> > message on the same line, this split does not contribute to better
>> > readability, quite the opposite, in my opinion.
>> >
>> > One line:
>> > ubi_err(ubi, "long line")
>> >
>> > Multiple lines:
>> > ubi_err(ubi, "long line,
>> >         parameters)
>>
>> You should discuss that with checkpatch team, because ARAIR it will
>> complain about "long line" with any other parameter in the same line.
>
> I respect checkpatch.pl, and uniformity / consistency, but in this
> particular case I put my maintainer hat on and say that for this kernel
> subsystem it is fine, because the maintainer will be more efficient in
> maintaining this code when the code is a bit mere readable for him.

I'm fine with that :) I think it may be even worth bringing to the
checkpatch / CodingStyle to allow such lines.

-- 
Rafał
--
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/