[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <78947796-9eef-4c53-b467-d32a151fcc92@freemail.hu>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 22:18:18 +0100
From: Szőke Benjamin <egyszeregy@...email.hu>
To: Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>
Cc: fw@...len.de, pablo@...filter.org, lorenzo@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, leitao@...ian.org, amiculas@...co.com,
davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] netfilter: Adjust code style of xt_*.h, ipt_*.h
files.
2025. 01. 08. 21:20 keltezéssel, Jozsef Kadlecsik írta:
> On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, Szőke Benjamin wrote:
>
>> 2025. 01. 07. 20:39 keltezéssel, Jozsef Kadlecsik írta:
>>> On Tue, 7 Jan 2025, egyszeregy@...email.hu wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Benjamin Szőke <egyszeregy@...email.hu>
>>>>
>>>> - Adjust tab indents
>>>> - Fix format of #define macros
>>>
>>> I don't really understand why it'd be important to use parentheses
>>> around plain constant values in macros. The kernel coding style does
>>> not list it as a requirement, see 12) 4. in
>>> Documentation/process/coding-style.rst.
>>
>> If it would be more than just a const value, parentheses is a must have
>> thing for it (now for it, it is not critical to have it but better to
>> get used to this). This is how my hand automatically do it, to avoid the
>> syntax problem in this coding.
>
> Are you going to "fix" this "issue" in the whole kernel tree?
>
> If yes, then please propose changes to the coding style documentation as
> well.
>
> If no, then please keep the macros as is because the changes would just
> introduce more different kind of notations in the source tree.
>
I will keep it, sorry. It it not provide any different notation. It is just a
parentheses for safe and defensive programming, it is not bad.
> Best regards,
> Jozsef
Powered by blists - more mailing lists