linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/12] samples: configfs: order includes alphabetically

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: <20201007134323.GA764@lst.de>
Date:   Wed, 7 Oct 2020 15:43:23 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/12] samples: configfs: order includes alphabetically

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 02:45:16PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> 
> The preferred coding style is to order all includes alphabetically for
> improved readability. There's no need for the configfs header to come
> last.

Is it?  People seem to have all kinds of weird opinions, but I don't
think any ordering really makes sense.  What does make sense it dropping
the pointless empty line, so I've folded that into the next patch.