linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] Staging: Lustre: Fixed coding style issues

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: <F2DFC001-0530-488C-902F-53B5D6ECC501@intel.com>
Date:	Sun, 17 Apr 2016 21:35:35 +0000
From:	"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
To:	Panos Vlachos <panosvlchs@...il.com>
CC:	"<devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Staging: Lustre: Fixed coding style issues


On Apr 17, 2016, at 10:11 AM, Panos Vlachos wrote:

> Fixed one coding style issue in the
> file router_proc.c (Lustre staging driver)

Perhaps it's best to reference what the issue is.
I.e. "Fix too long line in …"
and then in the actual message add that you just split it?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Panos Vlachos <panosvlchs@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router_proc.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router_proc.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router_proc.c
> index 65f65a3..87afb40 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router_proc.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/router_proc.c
> @@ -32,7 +32,8 @@
>  */
> #define LNET_PROC_CPT_BITS	(LNET_CPT_BITS + 1)
> /* change version, 16 bits or 8 bits */
> -#define LNET_PROC_VER_BITS	max_t(size_t, min_t(size_t, LNET_LOFFT_BITS, 64) / 4, 8)
> +#define LNET_PROC_VER_BITS	\
> +max_t(size_t, min_t(size_t, LNET_LOFFT_BITS, 64) / 4, 8)

Hm, I am not sure this is an improvement, you might want to at least place a tab at the start of this
second line, so that indentation helps us better see it's a continuation of the previous one.

Thanks.

> 
> #define LNET_PROC_HASH_BITS	LNET_PEER_HASH_BITS
> /*
> -- 
> 1.9.1
>