netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 01/10] eth: fbnic: reorder ethtool code

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: <20241220093846.3dcec7e3@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 09:38:46 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
Cc: <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/10] eth: fbnic: reorder ethtool code

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 15:53:18 +0100 Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> I thought type and name on separate lines are not desirable, it could be moved 
> to a single line in this commit. Assuming such adjustment,

I find this style more readable, TBH. I tend to break the line after
return type if the function declaration doesn't fit on a line and the
type is longer than 3 chars (IOW int/u32/u8 are exceptions).

Functions which end up looking like:

static struct some_type_struct *some_function_name_here(struct another *ptr,
                                                        int argument);

are really ugly. And break if > 3 chars is a simple rule to follow.

You will find that most of fbnic does not follow this style, because
I didn't write most of it. But most of the nfp driver does.

I think I learned the breaking after return type from Felix Fietkau.
Not that he specified the 3 character thing as pedantically as I do.

> Reviewed-by: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@...el.com>
> 
> Also, this would be a little bit out of scope for this commit, but seeing 
> relatively new code that does not use `for (int i = 0,...)` is surprising.

I think you at Intel try to adopt the novelties much more than the rest of us.
Let us old timers be, please.