Re: sparc: bpf_jit: Rename jump labels in bpf_jit_compile()

[Daniel Borkmann]

On 09/04/2016 09:20 AM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/Documentation/CodingStyle?id=865a1caa4b6b886babdd9d67e7c3608be4567a51

[ + Jonathan for above commit in linux-next ]

> > You seem to lack understanding of the difference between absolute
> > requirements and "advice".
> >
> > As Sparc maintainer I can choose to not take this "advice",
> > and I so choose to do so.
>
> Your conclusion can be fine in principle.
>
> I am just curious on how much further software development "fun" the recent update
> by a topic like "CodingStyle: Clarify and complete chapter 7" will trigger.

I don't want to drag this thread onwards for (way) too long, but clearly "it is
advised to indent labels with a single space (not tab)" (from diff in above commit)
doesn't really reflect the majority of kernel practice we have in-tree today and
actually rather adds more confusion than any clarification whatsoever:

  $ git grep -n "^\ [a-z_]*:" -- '*.[ch]' | wc -l
  4919
  $ git grep -n "^[a-z_]*:" -- '*.[ch]' | wc -l
  54686

A CodingStyle document should document what's regarded as a general consensus of
kernel coding practices, and thus should represent the /majority/ of coding style,
which (if I didn't screw up my git-grep line completely) above 9% does not really
reflect at all. So, new folks starting with kernel hacking reading this are rather
misguided, and code-wise it just adds up to have more inconsistencies from new
patches, or worse, have noisy patches (like this one) flying around that try to
brute-force everything into this advice.