linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] tty: hvc_console: Fix coding style issues of block comments

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: <YKYcFfKiHT39Gyey@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date:   Thu, 20 May 2021 10:21:41 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jirislaby@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linuxarm@...neuler.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] tty: hvc_console: Fix coding style issues of block
 comments

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 12:01:22PM +0800, Xiaofei Tan wrote:
> Hi Johan,
> 
> Thanks for reviewing this patch.
> 
> On 2021/5/17 22:15, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 02:37:10PM +0800, Xiaofei Tan wrote:
> >> Fix coding style issues of block comments, reported by checkpatch.pl.
> >> Besides, add a period at the end of the sentenses.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Xiaofei Tan <tanxiaofei@...wei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_console.c | 15 ++++++++++-----
> >>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_console.c b/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_console.c
> >> index 39018e5..a61cdf0 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_console.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_console.c
> >> @@ -177,7 +177,8 @@ static void hvc_console_print(struct console *co, const char *b,
> >>  			r = cons_ops[index]->put_chars(vtermnos[index], c, i);
> >>  			if (r <= 0) {
> >>  				/* throw away characters on error
> >> -				 * but spin in case of -EAGAIN */
> >> +				 * but spin in case of -EAGAIN.
> >> +				 */
> >
> > How is this an improvement? First, the multi-line comment style is
> >
> > 	/*
> > 	 * ...
> > 	 */
> >
> 
> Yes, mostly we use this style. I can follow it if new version is needed.

This is the preferred style outside of networking.

> BTW, How about add the '/*' check into checkpatch.pl?

Checkpatch already has too many checks IMO and I'm a bit surprised that
it doesn't check this already. Perhaps it's because you used the -f to
run checkpatch on in-kernel code, which you should not.

> > Second, that sentence is not capitalised so why do add a period?
> >
> 
> How about capitalize the sentence, or just remove the period ?

How about just leaving this unchanged?

> > Third, why are you sending checkpatch.pl cleanups for files outside of
> > staging?
> >
> 
> I'm sorry, Is this a rule, or kind of tradition? I've never heard of 
> this before.

Many subsystems reject pure style changes unless you're also doing some
real changes to the code in question. This is a good default rule, even
if some maintainers may occasionally accept churn like this.

You appear to be paid to do kernel work. Why don't you start fixing bugs
or help out reviewing new code instead of sending trivial patches like
this? We can always need another hand.

But if all you you want is to increase your company patch count then
please go work in drivers/staging where most trivial style changes are
currently accepted.

> > Unless doing some real changes to the files in question as well this is
> > mostly just churn and noise that makes it harder to backport fixes and
> > do code forensics for no real gain.
> 
> I'm not sure. But if cleanup patches have made it hard to backport fixes 
> and do code forensics, then the code quality may not be
> good enough.

No, that has nothing to do with code quality, it's just that you
introduce noise in the logs and do pointless changes of context which
makes it harder to use tools like git blame and makes backporting harder
for no good reason.

Johan