netdev - Re: [patch net-next v4 06/10] net: sched: introduce helpers to work with filter chains

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1495063028.31562.24.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 May 2017 16:17:08 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
        xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, dsa@...ulusnetworks.com,
        edumazet@...gle.com, stephen@...workplumber.org,
        daniel@...earbox.net, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
        simon.horman@...ronome.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v4 06/10] net: sched: introduce helpers to work
 with filter chains

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 14:44 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:39:05PM CEST, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
> > On 17-05-17 08:25 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > > Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:18:00PM CEST, jhs@...atatu.com wrote:
> > > > On 17-05-17 05:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > > > > From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Introduce struct tcf_chain object and set of helpers around it. Wraps up
> > > > > insertion, deletion and search in the filter chain.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > [..]
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static void
> > > > > +tcf_chain_filter_chain_ptr_set(struct tcf_chain *chain,
> > > > > +			       struct tcf_proto __rcu **p_filter_chain)
> > > > > +
> > > > 
> > > > What are the rules for this? Common coding style is:
> > > > static void tcf_chain_filter_chain_ptr_set(struct tcf_chain *chain,
> > > >                                           struct tcf_proto ..
> > > 
> > > When this would not fit 80 cols (this case), you need to wrap the
> > > text in front of the function name. That is exacly what I did.
> > > 
> > 
> > That i understand.
> > The question is: what does scripture dictate on conflict?
> > Should a function signature always follow coding style and
> > allow for exceeding 80 chars or the 80 chars rules trumps?
> 
> Definitelly 80 chars rules trumps here.

Disagree.
80 columns is just a "strongly preferred" limit.

Clarity for a human reader trumps everything else.