Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/4] ipc,shm: minor cleanups | From | Davidlohr Bueso <> | Date | Tue, 22 Apr 2014 22:25:45 -0700 |
| |
On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 07:07 +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > On 04/23/2014 04:53 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > - Breakup long function names/args. > > - Cleaup variable declaration. > > - s/current->mm/mm > > > > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com> > > --- > > ipc/shm.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++----------------------- > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/ipc/shm.c b/ipc/shm.c > > index f000696..584d02e 100644 > > --- a/ipc/shm.c > > +++ b/ipc/shm.c > > @@ -480,15 +480,13 @@ static const struct vm_operations_struct shm_vm_ops = { > > static int newseg(struct ipc_namespace *ns, struct ipc_params *params) > > { > > key_t key = params->key; > > - int shmflg = params->flg; > > + int id, error, shmflg = params->flg; > > It's largely a matter of taste (and I may be in a minority), and I know > there's certainly precedent in the kernel code, but I don't much like the > style of mixing variable declarations that have initializers, with other > unrelated declarations (e.g., variables without initializers). What is > the gain? One less line of text? That's (IMO) more than offset by the > small loss of readability.
Yes, it's taste. And yes, your in the minority, at least in many core kernel components and ipc.
Thanks, Davidlohr
| |