lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Mar]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] scsi: megaraid: cleanup formatting of megaraid
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022, Joe Perches wrote:

> On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 00:17 +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 11:44 PM Finn Thain wrote:
> > >
> > > Others might argue that they should always be changed from,
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * this style
> > > * of multiline comment
> > > */
> > >
> > > to
> > >
> > > /* this style
> > > * of multiline comment
> > > */
> >
> > In general, for things that the coding style guide talks about, we
> > should follow them, even if some subsystems do not (they can always
> > override in their folder if they really, really want it). So, here for
> > instance, the first one should be used.
>
> It's up to individual maintainers to each decide on what might be
> considered unnecessary churn for the subsystems they control.
>
> One argument is that churn leads to difficulty in backporting fixes to
> older 'stable' versions.
>
> I think the churn argument is overstated.
>

If you would have clang-format override the committer and retrospectively
apply subsystem style rules (rather than the rules used by a majority of
subsystems or those preferred by Linus for example) it would add friction
to code re-use, movement, comparison, any tree-wide program
transformation, and also subsystem boundary changes.

Per-subsystem style rules are inherently contentious and therefore good
candidates for the "leave alone" functionality discussed in the issue
tracker.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-03-04 08:48    [W:0.170 / U:0.164 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site