Re: [PATCH 1/3] CodingStyle updates

Scott Preece
2007-09-29T16:00:17Z

A couple of comments interspersed...

On 9/28/07, Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.sunysb.edu> wrote:
...
> There are a number of driver model diagnostic macros in <linux/device.h>
> which you should use to make sure messages are matched to the right device
---

I think this "which" is non-restrictive, so it should have a comma
after it (I realize that's not part of your patch). It's also possible
to read it as restrictive, in which case "that" would be preferable.

---
> and driver, and are tagged with the right level: dev_err(), dev_warn(),
> -dev_info(), and so forth. For messages that aren't associated with a
> -particular device, <linux/kernel.h> defines pr_debug() and pr_info().
> +dev_info(), and so forth.
> +
> +A number of people often like to define their own debugging printf's,
---

"A number of people often like to..." is awkward. How about
"Developers sometimes..." or "Too many people..."

---
> +wrapping printk's in #ifdef's that get turned on only when subsystem

> + Chapter 19: branch prediction optimizations
> +
> +The kernel includes macros called likely() and unlikely(), which can be used
---

You might say "The kernel provides the macros likely()..."

---
> +as hints to the compiler to optimize branch prediction. They operate by
...
> +A good example of this is the above kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL) call. The chances
> +of kmalloc() returning NULL are rather small, because even if it doesn't
> +have memory to return to you at the moment, with GFP_KERNEL/__GFP_WAIT
> +passed, kmalloc() will wait and suspend your thread, while it goes off to
---

The commas after "passed" and "thread" is unnecessary.

---
> +find some free memory (purging caches, flushing buffers, etc.). In other
> +words, kmalloc() tries very hard to give you the memory you asked for by the
> +time it return.
---

"...by the time it return." should be "...by the time it returns."

---
> +
> +Consider the next, bad example. Suppose you're developing a file system
> +which performs logically different actions on different types of entities:
---

This "which" is restrictive; it would be preferable to use "that" instead.

---
> +files, directories, symlinks, devices, etc. and you use this code:
> +
...
> +be penalized heavily for going [sic] down the wrong path... Therefore, you
> +should consider also whether a seemingly-rare condition is indeed rare ALL
---

The hyphen isn't necessary when the first word of the compount
adjective is an adverb ending in "-ly", so, just "seemingly rare"; or
switch to "apparently rare".

---
> +the time.
...

--
scott preece