[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <27838d8f-7664-fdb9-3f8a-5ca812acdf72@netfilter.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 21:20:33 +0100 (CET)
From: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>
To: Szőke Benjamin <egyszeregy@...email.hu>
cc: fw@...len.de, pablo@...filter.org, lorenzo@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, leitao@...ian.org, amiculas@...co.com,
davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] netfilter: Adjust code style of xt_*.h, ipt_*.h
files.
On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, Szőke Benjamin wrote:
> 2025. 01. 07. 20:39 keltezéssel, Jozsef Kadlecsik írta:
> > On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, egyszeregy@...email.hu wrote:
> >
> > > From: Benjamin Szőke <egyszeregy@...email.hu>
> > >
> > > - Adjust tab indents
> > > - Fix format of #define macros
> >
> > I don't really understand why it'd be important to use parentheses
> > around plain constant values in macros. The kernel coding style does
> > not list it as a requirement, see 12) 4. in
> > Documentation/process/coding-style.rst.
>
> If it would be more than just a const value, parentheses is a must have
> thing for it (now for it, it is not critical to have it but better to
> get used to this). This is how my hand automatically do it, to avoid the
> syntax problem in this coding.
Are you going to "fix" this "issue" in the whole kernel tree?
If yes, then please propose changes to the coding style documentation as
well.
If no, then please keep the macros as is because the changes would just
introduce more different kind of notations in the source tree.
Best regards,
Jozsef
--
E-mail : kadlec@...filter.org, kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, kadlecsik.jozsef@...ner.hu
Address: Wigner Research Centre for Physics
H-1525 Budapest 114, POB. 49, Hungary
Powered by blists - more mailing lists