All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa_takuya_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp>
To: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>, pbonzini@redhat.com
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Add helper function to clear a bit in unsync child bitmap
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 13:02:53 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <564D49ED.3020101@lab.ntt.co.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <564D3816.8080609@linux.intel.com>

On 2015/11/19 11:46, Xiao Guangrong wrote:

>> Actually, some people prefer to put braces when one of the
>> if/else-if/else cases has multiple lines.  You can see
>> some examples in kernel/sched/core.c: see hrtick_start(),
>> sched_fork(), free_sched_domain().
>>
>> In our case, I thought putting braces would align the else-if
>> and else and make the code look a bit nicer, but I know this
>> may be just a matter of personal feeling.
>>
>> In short, unless the maintainer, Paolo for this file, has any
>> preference, both ways will be accepted.
>
> The reason why i pointed this out is that it is the style documented
> in Documentation/CodingStyle:
> | Do not unnecessarily use braces where a single statement will do.
> |
> |        if (condition)
> |                action();
> |

Ah, this is a different thing.  For this case, there is a consensus
and checkpatch will complain if we don't obey the rule.

What I explained was:

   if (condition) {
      line1;
      line2;  // multiple lines
   } else if {
      single-line-statement;  -- (*1)
   } else
      single-line-statement;  -- (*2)

For (*1) and (*2), especially for (*1), some people put braces.

> Actually, Ingo Molnar hated this braces-style too much and blamed
> many developers who used this style (include me, that why i was
> nervous to see this style :( ).

I think he likes the coding style of kernel/sched/core.c very much,
as you know.  Actually that is one reason why I took it as an example.

Let's just choose the way which Paolo prefers for this time, I don't
know which is better.

Thank you,
   Takuya



  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-19  4:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-12 11:48 [PATCH 00/10 V2] KVM: x86: MMU: Clean up x86's mmu code for future work Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:49 ` [PATCH 01/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Remove unused parameter of __direct_map() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:50 ` [PATCH 02/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Add helper function to clear a bit in unsync child bitmap Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-18  2:44   ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-19  0:59     ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-19  2:46       ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-19  4:02         ` Takuya Yoshikawa [this message]
2015-11-12 11:51 ` [PATCH 03/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Make mmu_set_spte() return emulate value Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:51 ` [PATCH 04/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Remove is_rmap_spte() and use is_shadow_present_pte() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:52 ` [PATCH 05/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Use for_each_rmap_spte macro instead of pte_list_walk() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-13 21:47   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2015-11-14  9:20     ` Marcelo Tosatti
2015-11-16  2:51       ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-17 17:58         ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-18  3:07   ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-12 11:53 ` [PATCH 06/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Consolidate WARN_ON/BUG_ON checks for reverse-mapped sptes Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-13 22:08   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2015-11-16  3:34     ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:55 ` [PATCH 07/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Encapsulate the type of rmap-chain head in a new struct Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-18  3:21   ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-18  9:09     ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-19  2:23       ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:55 ` [PATCH 08/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Move initialization of parent_ptes out from kvm_mmu_alloc_page() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 11:56 ` [PATCH 09/10 RFC] KVM: x86: MMU: Move parent_pte handling from kvm_mmu_get_page() to link_shadow_page() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 14:27   ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-12 17:03     ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-13  2:15     ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-13 10:51       ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-11-18  3:32   ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-12 11:57 ` [PATCH 10/10] KVM: x86: MMU: Remove unused parameter parent_pte from kvm_mmu_get_page() Takuya Yoshikawa
2015-11-12 12:08 ` [PATCH 00/10 V2] KVM: x86: MMU: Clean up x86's mmu code for future work Paolo Bonzini

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=564D49ED.3020101@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    --to=yoshikawa_takuya_b1@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    --cc=guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.