netdev - Re: [PATCH 01/10] ftgmac100: Upgrade to NETIF_F_HW

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: <1491948401.7236.20.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Date:   Wed, 12 Apr 2017 08:06:41 +1000
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] ftgmac100: Upgrade to NETIF_F_HW_CSUM

On Tue, 2017-04-11 at 11:27 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > I'll fix it in a next spin if Dave wants it that way but otherwise
> > I'm keen to leave it as it is.
> 
> Please fix this and respin.
> 
> Meanwhile get the coding style rules changed if you disagree with
> them.  A patch series review is not the place to argue about your
> disagreement with the coding style rules.

I will fix.

Note that I don't disagree with the rule as stated.

However I'd like to point out that the rule doesn't precisely match
the construct here as it's for a dangling single else while what I
had here is an else if ... so it's open to intepretation :-)

I also tend to disagree that coding style rules should be firm laws,
imho they should be considered in context and broken if they render
a given piece of code less clear.

That said, I will respin.

Cheers,
Ben.