[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72=SWen7sJxvQGD5N=ur-gpOiFGeHHfjegHxjaHfN_i95Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2022 11:06:38 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
Cc: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Konstantin Meskhidze <konstantin.meskhidze@...wei.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/7] Landlock: Clean up coding style with clang-format
Hi Mickaël,
(Answering in v1 since I want to quote something in this cover letter)
On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 6:03 PM Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> wrote:
>
> I used a simple coding style for the initial Landlock code. However,
> this may be subject to different interpretations. To avoid relying
> on tacit knowledge or text editors for these kind of rules, let's
> automate it as much as possible thanks to clang-format. This makes the
> code formatting simple, consistent and impersonal.
Thanks for moving your subsystem to `clang-format`. I am glad you
found it useful.
> Several versions of clang-format can be use but they may have (small)
> different behaviors for undefined/new configuration parts. After
> testing different versions, I picked clang-format-14 which is relatively
> new and fixes a bug present in version 11 to 13 (visible in the Landlock
> formatted code).
Which was the bug?
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists