Re: [patch net-next v4 06/10] net: sched: introduce helpers to work with filter chains

[Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>]

Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:39:05PM CEST, jhs@mojatatu.com wrote:
>On 17-05-17 08:25 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:18:00PM CEST, jhs@mojatatu.com wrote:
>> > On 17-05-17 05:07 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > > From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>
>> > > 
>> > > Introduce struct tcf_chain object and set of helpers around it. Wraps up
>> > > insertion, deletion and search in the filter chain.
>> > > 
>> > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@mellanox.com>
>> > > ---
>> > 
>> > [..]
>> > > +
>> > > +static void
>> > > +tcf_chain_filter_chain_ptr_set(struct tcf_chain *chain,
>> > > +			       struct tcf_proto __rcu **p_filter_chain)
>> > > +
>> > 
>> > What are the rules for this? Common coding style is:
>> > static void tcf_chain_filter_chain_ptr_set(struct tcf_chain *chain,
>> >                                           struct tcf_proto ..
>> 
>> When this would not fit 80 cols (this case), you need to wrap the
>> text in front of the function name. That is exacly what I did.
>> 
>
>That i understand.
>The question is: what does scripture dictate on conflict?
>Should a function signature always follow coding style and
>allow for exceeding 80 chars or the 80 chars rules trumps?

Definitelly 80 chars rules trumps here.