[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190207170848.GG2414@zn.tnic>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 18:08:48 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
"Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
Chris von Recklinghausen <crecklin@...hat.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, Scott Wood <swood@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/9] jump_label: Add the jump_label_can_update_check()
helper
On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 06:00:53PM +0100, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira wrote:
> It is taking 95 characters. In this case, wouldn't be better to break?
>
> if (!kernel_text_address(jump_entry_code(entry))) {
> WARN_ONCE(1, "can't patch jump_label at %pS",
> (void *)jump_entry_code(entry));
> return false;
> }
>
> I agree your suggestion is better... just confirming that 95 is not too long...
Well, current monitors are always > 80 cols unless someone has a tmux
with a gazillion windows in it (yeah, I know of a couple people who do
that :)) and at least to me, breaking the line like that looks less
readable because I need to look at the two lines to parse what's going
on.
Vs when you have one long line, so you look at
WARN_ONCE(...
and go, oh, ok, we're warning here and nothing else. Without paying too
much attention to the actual arguments of the WARN.
But this is just me.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists