From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 5/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1e: implement socket option TCP_COOKIE_TRANSACTIONS
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 01:25:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B08D967.80003@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091120.092651.254794724.davem@davemloft.net>
David Miller wrote:
> From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:48:12 -0500
>> + if (ctd.tcpct_used > 0
>> + || (tp->cookie_values == NULL
>> + && (sysctl_tcp_cookie_size > 0
>> + || ctd.tcpct_cookie_desired > 0
>> + || ctd.tcpct_s_data_desired > 0))) {
>
> Please fix the conditional coding style, and the alignment of
> the lines, it's not right here.
>
Eliding the repeated assertions, and focusing on this example.
This is not addressed (nor forbidden) in CodingStyle.
As Joe noted earlier with '?' and ':', there are ample examples
throughout the code base of this style, including here and there
among the tcp*.c files. Obviously, this is very easy to read!
Coding style is all about readability and maintainability
using commonly available tools.
However, grep shows that the "||" or "&&" is elsewhere most often
indented 4 for each level (although there is some inconsistency).
Either 1, 2, or 4 distinguishes <condition> indentation from
<statements> indented by tab (8).
In my experience, I've found 1 best, as that lines up variables
and parentheses levels, and it's easy to type. But it certainly
would be easy enough to indent by 2 or 4 instead.
BTW, the 'indent' program turns this into incomprehensible and
unmaintainable garbage. Of course, there are ample examples of
garbage in these tcp*.c files, too.... :-(
Therefore, David, would indentation of 2 or 4 be preferable here?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-22 6:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-20 14:04 [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 0/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1: cookie option exchange William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 14:12 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 1/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1a: add request_values parameter for sending SYNACK William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 17:20 ` David Miller
2009-11-20 14:23 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 2/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1b: generate Responder Cookie secret William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 17:22 ` David Miller
2009-11-20 20:47 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-20 20:51 ` David Miller
2009-11-21 16:09 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 14:33 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 3/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1c: sysctl_tcp_cookie_size, socket option TCP_COOKIE_TRANSACTIONS William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 17:24 ` David Miller
2009-11-21 16:51 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-11-21 19:18 ` David Miller
2009-11-21 19:22 ` David Miller
2009-11-22 4:40 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 14:38 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 4/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1d: define TCP cookie option, extend existing struct's William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 17:25 ` David Miller
2009-11-22 4:53 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 14:48 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 5/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1e: implement socket option TCP_COOKIE_TRANSACTIONS William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 17:26 ` David Miller
2009-11-20 20:54 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-22 6:25 ` William Allen Simpson [this message]
2009-11-22 7:10 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-23 11:16 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-11-23 17:25 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-23 17:49 ` David Miller
2009-11-23 0:31 ` David Miller
2009-11-23 18:28 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH] net/ipv4: Move && and || to end of previous line Joe Perches
2009-11-23 18:31 ` David Miller
2009-11-23 18:38 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-23 18:41 ` David Miller
2009-11-29 21:00 ` [PATCH net-next-2.6 PATCH] net: " Joe Perches
2009-11-30 0:55 ` David Miller
2009-11-30 17:28 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-11-30 17:57 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-30 21:00 ` David Miller
2009-12-03 17:58 ` [PATCH net-next-2.6] drivers/net: " Joe Perches
2009-12-03 20:40 ` David Miller
2009-12-04 13:10 ` Brice Goglin
2009-12-04 17:21 ` Joe Perches
2009-12-05 12:43 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-12-05 17:50 ` Joe Perches
2009-12-05 22:05 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-12-06 3:36 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-12-05 22:21 ` David Miller
2009-12-06 3:00 ` William Allen Simpson
2009-12-06 17:01 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-12-04 22:42 ` David Miller
2009-11-23 22:08 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH] net/ipv4: " Ilpo Järvinen
2009-11-23 22:14 ` Joe Perches
2009-11-23 22:32 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2009-11-23 18:58 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH] net/ipv6: " Joe Perches
2009-11-24 22:53 ` David Miller
2009-11-23 19:49 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH] net/ipv[46]/netfilter: " Joe Perches
2009-11-23 22:20 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-11-20 14:55 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 6/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1f: Initiator Cookie => Responder William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 17:29 ` David Miller
2009-11-20 15:06 ` [net-next-2.6 PATCH v7 7/7 RFC] TCPCT part 1g: Responder Cookie => Initiator William Allen Simpson
2009-11-20 17:31 ` David Miller
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=4B08D967.80003@gmail.com \
--to=william.allen.simpson@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).