From: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
Cc: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>,
"Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC] devtools: increase default line length to 100
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:59:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200610095910.GA1587@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a5afd4cc-9cb7-229f-bec5-a8fefa812344@solarflare.com>
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 12:28:53PM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> On 6/10/20 11:47 AM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:57 PM Andrew Rybchenko
> > <arybchenko@solarflare.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 6/10/20 8:22 AM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 7:27 PM Bruce Richardson
> >>> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 04:40:28PM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> >>>>> On 6/9/20 1:00 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 12:17:23PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 17:46:40 +0100 Bruce Richardson
> >>>>>>>> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Rather than continuing to recommend an 80-char line limit, let's
> >>>>>>>>> take a hint from the Linux kernel[1] and aim for an 100-char
> >>>>>>>>> recommended limit instead.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=bdc48fa11e46f867ea4d75fa59ee87a7f48be144
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> ---
> >>>>>>>>> devtools/checkpatches.sh | 2 +-
> >>>>>>>>> doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.rst | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2
> >>>>>>>>> insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/devtools/checkpatches.sh b/devtools/checkpatches.sh
> >>>>>>>>> index 158087f1c..4970ed830 100755 --- a/devtools/checkpatches.sh +++
> >>>>>>>>> b/devtools/checkpatches.sh @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
> >>>>>>>>> VALIDATE_NEW_API=$(dirname $(readlink -f $0))/check-symbol-change.sh
> >>>>>>>>> # Codespell can also be enabled by setting DPDK_CHECKPATCH_CODESPELL
> >>>>>>>>> to a valid path # to a dictionary.txt file if dictionary.txt is not
> >>>>>>>>> in the default location.
> >>>>>>>>> codespell=${DPDK_CHECKPATCH_CODESPELL:-enable}
> >>>>>>>>> -length=${DPDK_CHECKPATCH_LINE_LENGTH:-80}
> >>>>>>>>> +length=${DPDK_CHECKPATCH_LINE_LENGTH:-100}
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> # override default Linux options options="--no-tree" diff --git
> >>>>>>>>> a/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.rst
> >>>>>>>>> b/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.rst index
> >>>>>>>>> 4efde93f6..1db3a7bbe 100644 ---
> >>>>>>>>> a/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.rst +++
> >>>>>>>>> b/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.rst @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ The
> >>>>>>>>> rules and guidelines given in this document cannot cover every
> >>>>>>>>> situation, so * In the case of creating new files, the style should
> >>>>>>>>> be consistent within each file in a given directory or module. *
> >>>>>>>>> The primary reason for coding standards is to increase code
> >>>>>>>>> readability and comprehensibility, therefore always use whatever
> >>>>>>>>> option
> >>>>>>> will make the code easiest to read.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> -Line length is recommended to be not more than 80 characters,
> >>>>>>>>> including comments. +Line length is recommended to be not more than
> >>>>>>>>> 100 characters, including comments. [Tab stop size should be
> >>>>>>>>> assumed to be 8-characters wide].
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> .. note::
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I would even support going to 120 characters.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think 100 is enough.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In my case, I have a 1080p 24" monitor, and with two terminals
> >>>>>>> side-by-side 100 characters just fits inside each vim window. Going to
> >>>>>>> 120 would be fine for single terminal at a time, but I would find
> >>>>>>> awkward for e.g. side-by-side diff comparison in meld etc.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> My preference would be to keep things as it is - 80 chars per line.
> >>>>>> Having multiple different formatting styles in one source file looks
> >>>>>> really awkward and make it hard to follow.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>>
> >>>> I wouldn't personally consider increasing the max line length as a style
> >>>> change, but even if you consider it such I'd worry about rejecting style
> >>>> changes on the basis that it may be different to what is there before. That
> >>>> logic means that we can never, ever change any element of DPDK coding style.
> >>>>
> >>>> I can see the issue with changes that require us to rework the style of
> >>>> code in order to comply with the new style, but changing the max length
> >>>> from 80 to 100 does not make 80-char lines incorrect and needing changes.
> >>>
> >>> Another point is: Other projects derived from the Linux kernel coding
> >>> standard also
> >>> getting migrated to the new coding standard. This change would be useful for:
> >>> a) People works on multiple Linux coding standard derived projects
> >>
> >> Valid point, but not really strong.
> >> I think that .editorconfig solves it.
> >
> > Yes, For adding the code. I meaning, Viewing the code there will be a disparity.
>
> I hope you're not suggesting to reformat all existing code.
> Otherwise the disparity will be there for a long-long time
> anyway.
>
> >>
> >>> b) Some of the code such as 'base' and 'common' code for HW drivers
> >>> are shared between multiple projects.
> >>> Such code needs adjustment/change when pulling to the DPDK code base
> >>> it it still follows 80 chars per line.
> >>
> >> Base and common code are not required to follow DPDK coding
> >> style even now.
> >
> > I see, I dont think it is expressed in devtools/checkpatches.sh. I.e
> > CI tools still flag as checkpatch issues.
>
> Yes, it is an area which should be improved.
>
> > Coming to original concern:(code disparity with existing code)
> > Another option is, It is possible to change existing code to 100 lines
> > with clang-format in an automatic fashion. But it will have a lot of
> > changes.
> > "C_Cpp.clang_format_style": "{ BasedOnStyle: LLVM,
> > IndentWidth: 8, TabWidth: 8, UseTab: Always,
> > AllowShortIfStatementsOnASingleLine: false, IndentCaseLabels: false,
> > ColumnLimit: 100, AllowShortFunctionsOnASingleLine: false,
> > AlwaysBreakAfterReturnType: AllDefinitions, ColumnLimit: 100,
> > ConstructorInitializerAllOnOneLineOrOnePerLine: true,
> > ConstructorInitializerIndentWidth: 8, ContinuationIndentWidth: 8,
> > BreakBeforeBraces: Linux, AllowShortBlocksOnASingleLine: false,
> > AlignConsecutiveAssignments: false, AlignEscapedNewlines: Right,
> > AlignConsecutiveMacros : true, MaxEmptyLinesToKeep : 1,
> > Cpp11BracedListStyle : true, AlignTrailingComments : true,
> > ForEachMacros: ['TAILQ_FOREACH_SAFE', STAILQ_FOREACH',
> > 'rte_graph_foreach_node', 'TAILQ_FOREACH', 'RTE_ETH_FOREACH_DEV']}",
>
> No, no, no. Please, no. It will complicate backporting a lot,
> it will break (over-complicate) git blame.
> (I hope it was suggested just to be sure that it will not be
> done).
+1 for this. I don't think we can ever take any style changes into DPDK
which require us to reformat all our existing code.
Thankfully, as I've stated before, this is not such a change, since code
which is under 80 chars long is also under 100 chars long so no issue. :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-10 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-08 16:46 Bruce Richardson
2020-06-08 19:17 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-06-09 4:42 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-06-09 9:29 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-06-09 10:00 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-06-09 13:40 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-06-09 13:57 ` Bruce Richardson
2020-06-10 5:22 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-06-10 8:27 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-06-10 8:47 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-06-10 9:28 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-06-10 9:59 ` Bruce Richardson [this message]
2020-08-07 0:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200610095910.GA1587@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).