netdev - Re: rfc: checkpatch logical line continuations (was IBM Akebono: Add support for a new PHY interface to the IBM emac driver)

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: <1394228725.16156.102.camel@joe-AO722>
Date:	Fri, 07 Mar 2014 13:45:25 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	josh@...htriplett.org
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, alistair@...ple.id.au,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: rfc: checkpatch logical line continuations (was IBM Akebono:
 Add support for a new PHY interface to the IBM emac driver)

On Fri, 2014-03-07 at 13:30 -0800, josh@...htriplett.org wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 01:02:44PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-03-07 at 15:41 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Alistair Popple <alistair@...ple.id.au>
> > > Date: Thu,  6 Mar 2014 14:52:25 +1100
> > > 
> > > > +	out_be32(dev->reg, in_be32(dev->reg) | WKUP_ETH_RGMIIEN
> > > > +		 | WKUP_ETH_TX_OE | WKUP_ETH_RX_IE);
> > > 
> > > When an expression spans multiple lines, the lines should end with
> > > operators rather than begin with them.
> > 
> > That's not in CodingStyle currently.
> 
> It's also not even remotely consistent across existing kernel code, and
> it isn't obvious that there's a general developer consensus on the
> "right" way to write it.

I agree with that.  Stuff that's not in CodingStyle generally
doesn't have a developer consensus.

> > Right now, checkpatch emits a --strict only warning on "&&" or "||"
> > at the beginning of line but that could be changed to any "$Operators"
> > 
> > our $Arithmetic = qr{\+|-|\*|\/|%};
> > our $Operators	= qr{
> > 			<=|>=|==|!=|
> > 			=>|->|<<|>>|<|>|!|~|
> > 			&&|\|\||,|\^|\+\+|--|&|\||$Arithmetic
> > 		  }x;
> > 
> > The ones that likely have a too high false positive rates
> > are the negation "!" and bitwise "~".
> 
> I don't think warning about operators at start of line seems like a good
> idea at all.  There are plenty of cases where putting the operator at
> the start of the line will produce a better result.  (I'd actually
> suggest that in *most* cases.)
> 
> > Also, using perl, it's hard to distinguish between a
> > logical "&" and the address-of "&" as well as the
> > multiplication "*" and indirection "*" so maybe those
> > should be excluded too.
> > 
> > And I think it should only be added as a --strict test.
> 
> Agreed, if even that.

And probably made specific to net/ and drivers/net like
a few other comment style tests until such time as a
consensus exists.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html