linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH trivial] include/linux/gfp.h: Improve the coding styles

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: <20160227024548.GP1215@thunk.org>
Date:	Fri, 26 Feb 2016 21:45:48 -0500
From:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	Chen Gang <chengang@...ndsoft.com.cn>
Cc:	Jianyu Zhan <nasa4836@...il.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>, trivial@...nel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, rientjes@...gle.com,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, vdavydov@...tuozzo.com,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH trivial] include/linux/gfp.h: Improve the coding styles

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:26:02PM +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> > As for coding style, actually IMHO this patch is even _not_ a coding
> > style, more like a code shuffle, indeed.
> > 
> 
> "80 column limitation" is about coding style, I guess, all of us agree
> with it.

No, it's been accepted that checkpatch requiring people to reformat
code to within be 80 columns limitation was actively harmful, and it
no longer does that.

Worse, it now complains when you split a printf string across lines,
so there were patches that split a string across multiple lines to
make checkpatch shut up.  And now there are patches that join the
string back together.

And if you now start submitting patches to split them up again because
you think the 80 column restriction is so darned important, that would
be even ***more*** code churn.

Which is one of the reasons why some of us aren't terribly happy with
people who start running checkpatch -file on other people's code and
start submitting patches, either through the trivial patch portal or
not.

Mel, as an MM developer, has already NACK'ed the patch, which means
you should not send the patch to **any** upstream maintainer for
inclusion.

						- Ted