From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-188.mta1.migadu.com (out-188.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.188]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 124081C578C for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 08:27:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.188 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728548866; cv=none; b=jSnmo67kVZLJD5d6Y+eNlCMkKtNzS1h4JZINO3EQsbeB1znjWBNL5tMG4jcxtN7a26d3wWvDqLsulHN6pbeXGbUciBHN+RzO8zBqL4heenCEuZEhPmAAiozCv8y6laG8giHDF/R+UAlEg7/+AF1mN71WOm4VvohKFnl2yNTPrEs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728548866; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OLpqfbUo47Mgg1AF+AqQ6LJo3GkfDbyNDNhOxZ5NoUc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dPauFEMOSdHbaBXJdgi68rYpL5lI757IebcgKW7WtXZ4u51Ayo4TXPvAJ11yVTMW4H7H7wMjTJ45OFLR0toca14cSj5W0hZLPlk/QGDIf9R7RI0ZGEunuYKb4/INNwp/KbtURZmE8YwHBbp7cusD2e1sT8H0x0b/stjfQPgaPJ4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=iotcl.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=iotcl.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=iotcl.com header.i=@iotcl.com header.b=6eoAd9iS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.188 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=iotcl.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=iotcl.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=iotcl.com header.i=@iotcl.com header.b="6eoAd9iS" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iotcl.com; s=key1; t=1728548859; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=OLpqfbUo47Mgg1AF+AqQ6LJo3GkfDbyNDNhOxZ5NoUc=; b=6eoAd9iSTp6scoM3zGjT6hLUls0Ehczj/IwHpCZtNg/SaVDFNAxtZWkUZ5WLsugTUwCXR1 XrnzjVHFTUMahdLsi7uYc9y6PgDbqWL1bwJ73iyqiyNP7xt6w8ptc9Axf9VDGC+uHTFlpj xeBBiKJwnUCAVGzaS9ykU4raBp79BHE= From: Toon Claes To: Karthik Nayak , karthik.188@gmail.com Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] clang-format: align consecutive macro definitions In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 10:27:08 +0200 Message-ID: <87a5fcs6qr.fsf@iotcl.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Karthik Nayak writes: > We generally align consecutive macro definitions for better readability. > So let's add the rule in clang-format to follow this. > > Signed-off-by: Karthik Nayak I think it's valuable to add an example what bad vs good formatted code looks like. Otherwise no comments about this series. -- Toon