Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont
From: Sergey Senozhatsky
Date: Thu Dec 15 2016 - 21:00:53 EST
On (12/15/16 17:50), Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky
> <sergey.senozhatsky.work@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > basically I'm talking about a bunch of 80-cols fixups.
> Please don't.
I was really going to ask "do we still follow the 80 cols rule?" as
the first line in that email, but then I looked into scripts/checkpatch.pl
my $max_line_length = 80;
and assumed that the rule is still active.
> Nobody uses a vt100 terminal any more. The 80-column wrapping is
> excessive, and makes things like "grep" not work as well.
> No, we still don't want excessively long lines, but that's generally
> mainly because
> (a) we don't want to have excessively _complicated_ lines
> (b) we don't want to have excessively deep indentation (so if line
> length is due to 4+ levels of indentation, that's usually the primary
> (c) email quoting gets iffier and uglier, so short lines always are
> preferred if possible
> but in general, aside from those concerns, a long legible line is
> generally preferred over just adding line breaks for the very
> _occasional_ line.
ok. I was 99% sure those 80+ cols lines were not accidental.
> At the 100-column mark you almost have to break, because at that point
> people may start to be actually limited by their displays, but 80
> columns generally isn't it.
> In fact, I thought we already upped the check-patch limit to 100?
I believe someone proposed it at the last kernel summit (or at least
attempted to propose it, but I'm not sure if it was successful).