netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: sfp: Clean up errors in sfp.h

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]

Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2023 17:54:09 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>
Cc: chenguohua@...i.cn, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sfp: Clean up errors in sfp.h

On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 12:14:02PM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 11:01:21AM +0800, chenguohua@...i.cn wrote:
> > Fix the following errors reported by checkpatch:
> > 
> > ERROR: spaces required around that '=' (ctx:VxW)
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: GuoHua Cheng <chenguohua@...i.cn>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/sfp.h | 8 ++++----
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/sfp.h b/include/linux/sfp.h
> > index 9346cd44814d..725c8381a347 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/sfp.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/sfp.h
> > @@ -289,10 +289,10 @@ enum {
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_8B10B		= 0x01,
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_4B5B		= 0x02,
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_NRZ		= 0x03,
> > -	SFF8024_ENCODING_8472_MANCHESTER= 0x04,
> > +	SFF8024_ENCODING_8472_MANCHESTER = 0x04,
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_8472_SONET	= 0x05,
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_8472_64B66B	= 0x06,
> > -	SFF8024_ENCODING_8436_MANCHESTER= 0x06,
> > +	SFF8024_ENCODING_8436_MANCHESTER = 0x06,
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_8436_SONET	= 0x04,
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_8436_64B66B	= 0x05,
> >  	SFF8024_ENCODING_256B257B	= 0x07,
> > @@ -306,11 +306,11 @@ enum {
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_MT_RJ		= 0x08,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_MU		= 0x09,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_SG		= 0x0a,
> > -	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_OPTICAL_PIGTAIL= 0x0b,
> > +	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_OPTICAL_PIGTAIL = 0x0b,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_MPO_1X12	= 0x0c,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_MPO_2X16	= 0x0d,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_HSSDC_II	= 0x20,
> > -	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_COPPER_PIGTAIL= 0x21,
> > +	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_COPPER_PIGTAIL = 0x21,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_RJ45		= 0x22,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_NOSEPARATE	= 0x23,
> >  	SFF8024_CONNECTOR_MXC_2X16	= 0x24,
> 
> To be consistent, other enum's indentation should also be aligned to match
> the longest ones (MANCHESTER and PIGTAIL).
> 
> In netdev, though, checkpatch fixes are not welcome (auto-rejected) as these
> make stable backports more convoluted.

And I, as the author of the file, prefer the "=" to all line up here
without being indented excessively. Given the low number that are
like this, on balance, it's not a huge problem.

That's the thing with coding style - does fixing a coding style issue
make the code more or less readable, and does it introduce a
maintenance issue going forward to fix it. Arguably, indenting all the
constants by an addtional tab _could_ be done, but that becomes a big
change, which as pointed out, can make future maintenance in terms of
backporting a nightmare.

Does fixing the style make the code more readable? Not at all, it's
no different.

So on balance, the right answer is definitely to leave it as-is.

Thanks.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!