Re: [PATCH 5/4] ipc,shm: minor cleanups

[Davidlohr Bueso]

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@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/