From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1C77C5ACAE for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:15:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F1182171F for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:15:43 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9F1182171F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=perches.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 354C0202E290E; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 01:15:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: None (no SPF record) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=216.40.44.79; helo=smtprelay.hostedemail.com; envelope-from=joe@perches.com; receiver=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0079.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 561C8202C80B7 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 01:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE5E1801585D; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:15:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-HE-Tag: help45_1436e6ec66121 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2134 Received: from XPS-9350.home (unknown [47.151.152.152]) (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf13.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 08:15:38 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] nvdimm: Use more common kernel coding style From: Joe Perches To: Dan Williams , Miguel Ojeda Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 01:15:37 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.1-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Dan Carpenter Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Sender: "Linux-nvdimm" On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 01:00 -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > Hi Joe, > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 7:55 PM Joe Perches wrote: > > Rather than have a local coding style, use the typical kernel style. > > I'd rather automate this. I'm going to do once-over with clang-format > and see what falls out. I am adding Miguel Ojeda to the cc's. Of course you are welcome to try it, but I believe that clang-format doesn't work all that well yet. It's more a work in progress rather than a "standard". I believe you'll find that the patch series I sent ends up with a rather more typical kernel style. I suggest you try to apply the series I sent and then run clang-format on that and see the differences. Ideally one day, something tool like clang-format might be locally applied by every developer for their own personal style with some other neutral style the content actually distributed. cheers, Joe _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm