linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] CodingStyle: flip the rule about curlies

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: <2025051204-runt-mobility-6fbc@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 18:56:56 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jeff Johnson <jeff.johnson@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, corbet@....net,
	workflows@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] CodingStyle: flip the rule about curlies

On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 09:43:10AM -0700, Jeff Johnson wrote:
> On 5/9/2025 11:18 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, May 09, 2025 at 11:34:30PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> >> Require set of curlies {} in all if/else branches and all loops
> >> not matter how simple.
> > 
> > Sorry, but no, we are not going to change this long-term coding style
> > rule for no real reason at this point in time.
> 
> Is the infamous Apple SSL bug (CVE-2014-1266) a good reason?

One bug in 2014 will require us to touch 30+ million lines of code?

Please be reasonable.

And everyone, remember _why_ we have a coding style.  It's not so much
the specifics of _what_ the coding style is, it's the fact that we have
one at all.  Don't argue the specifics of the coding style without a
really really good reason why, with real details and proof.

It took us a long time to increase the default line length, and that too
is still argued about for very good and valid reasons.  That was
discussed in detail, not just thrown at us like this patch series was.

thanks,

greg k-h