All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: michael@ellerman.id.au
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Andres Salomon <dilinger@queued.net>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: OLPC: speed up device tree creation during boot (v2)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 07:04:04 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CE54064.6010702@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1290078135.22575.4.camel@concordia>

On 11/18/2010 03:02 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 09:34 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> Look at the general balance of hardship: very little harm is done (it's not a big 
>> deal if a variable is only used in a single function) but having it with local 
>> variables can be _really_ harmful - for example i overlooked them when i reviewed 
>> this patch. I dont like important details obscured - i like them to be apparent. 
>> Again, this is something that some people can parse immediately on the visual level 
>> - me and many others cannot.
> 

No, sorry, this sounds like a personal preference that is well out of
line with the vast majority of C programmers I've ever come across, not
just in the Linux kernel world but outside of it.

> What about:
> 
> int foo(void)
> {
> 	static int bar;
> 
> 	struct thing_struct *thing;
> 	int other_var;
> 	char *p;
> 
> 	...
> }
> 
> I think the visual wrongness of that formatting would be enough for me
> to stop and look twice. Though I guess it doesn't work if you have few,
> or no other variables other than the statics to declare.
> 

I wouldn't object to a convention like that, but let's bloody well
realize that that is a brand new convention, and if this convention is
going to stick at all it needs to be made official and put in CodingStyle.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: michael-Gsx/Oe8HsFggBc27wqDAHg@public.gmane.org
Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	Milton Miller <miltonm-ogEGBHC/i9Y@public.gmane.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	Andres Salomon <dilinger-pFFUokh25LWsTnJN9+BGXg@public.gmane.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo-X9Un+BFzKDI@public.gmane.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: OLPC: speed up device tree creation during boot (v2)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 07:04:04 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CE54064.6010702@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1290078135.22575.4.camel@concordia>

On 11/18/2010 03:02 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 09:34 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>
>> Look at the general balance of hardship: very little harm is done (it's not a big 
>> deal if a variable is only used in a single function) but having it with local 
>> variables can be _really_ harmful - for example i overlooked them when i reviewed 
>> this patch. I dont like important details obscured - i like them to be apparent. 
>> Again, this is something that some people can parse immediately on the visual level 
>> - me and many others cannot.
> 

No, sorry, this sounds like a personal preference that is well out of
line with the vast majority of C programmers I've ever come across, not
just in the Linux kernel world but outside of it.

> What about:
> 
> int foo(void)
> {
> 	static int bar;
> 
> 	struct thing_struct *thing;
> 	int other_var;
> 	char *p;
> 
> 	...
> }
> 
> I think the visual wrongness of that formatting would be enough for me
> to stop and look twice. Though I guess it doesn't work if you have few,
> or no other variables other than the statics to declare.
> 

I wouldn't object to a convention like that, but let's bloody well
realize that that is a brand new convention, and if this convention is
going to stick at all it needs to be made official and put in CodingStyle.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-11-18 15:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-12  5:45 [PATCH 3/3] x86: OLPC: speed up device tree creation during boot (v2) Andres Salomon
2010-11-12  5:45 ` Andres Salomon
2010-11-12  7:48 ` Milton Miller
2010-11-12  7:48   ` Milton Miller
2010-11-12  8:27   ` Andres Salomon
2010-11-12  8:27     ` Andres Salomon
2010-11-14  9:50     ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-15  4:21       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-11-15  4:21         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-11-15  7:02         ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-15  7:02           ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-15 17:43           ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-11-15 17:43             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-11-17  6:12             ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: OLPC: speed up device tree creation during boot (v3) Andres Salomon
2010-11-17  6:12               ` Andres Salomon
2010-11-29 23:39               ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: OLPC: speed up device tree creation during boot (v4) Andres Salomon
2010-12-16  2:58                 ` [tip:x86/olpc] x86, olpc: Speed up device tree creation during boot tip-bot for Andres Salomon
2010-11-18  8:34             ` [PATCH 3/3] x86: OLPC: speed up device tree creation during boot (v2) Ingo Molnar
2010-11-18  8:34               ` Ingo Molnar
2010-11-18 11:02               ` Michael Ellerman
2010-11-18 11:02                 ` Michael Ellerman
2010-11-18 15:04                 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2010-11-18 15:04                   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-11-18 17:41                   ` Andres Salomon
2010-11-18 17:41                     ` Andres Salomon
2010-11-18 17:48                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-11-18 17:48                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-11-19 20:24                       ` Andres Salomon
2010-11-19 20:24                         ` Andres Salomon
2010-12-23 11:57               ` Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4CE54064.6010702@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=dilinger@queued.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=miltonm@bga.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.