Re: [PATCH] staging: axis-fifo: alignment should match opening parenthesis in axis-fifo.c

[Dan Carpenter]

On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 09:07:37AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Mar 07, 2023 at 08:49:55AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 7 Mar 2023, Khadija wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey Julia! Thank you for the feedback. I will make the following changes and
> > > > resend the patch:
> > > > 1. Correct the patch description that is right under the subject line (make
> > > > it precise and imperative) and make sure that it does not have more than 70
> > > > characters per line.
> > > > 2. Adjust all the arguments of wait_event_interruptible_timeout so that they
> > > > are lined up. All of them should begin right under ( .
> > >
> > > The problem here is that the ( is really far to the right.  My opinion is
> > > that the position of the second argument (ie the first one that is on a
> > > line of its own) is ok in this case.  So you can leave that one where it
> > > is and line up the other one.
> > >
> >
> > I kind of like lining things up like this.  I think if you can't align
> > things with the parens, then it's nice to at least use two tabs.  It's
> > not kernel style or anyone's style explicitly, but I kind of like it.
> >
> > It doesn't make checkpatch happy.
> >
> > I guess I probably wouldn't bother sending this patch.  To controversial.
> > I'd just move on to something else.  It's not like there is a shortage
> > of stuff to do.  One idea in this file is that you could use
> > sysfs_emit() in sysfs_read() and get rid of char tmp[32]; buffer.
> 
> Dan, the problem is not that the argument is to the left of the (
> 
> The problem is that the last argument is indented exactly as though it
> were an argument of the second argument.  But it's not.  You have to count
> the parentheses to see that.  It's very misleading.
> 

True.  I get that.  I guess any change which fixes that is worth
applying.

regards,
dan carpenter