From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-42ab.mail.infomaniak.ch (smtp-42ab.mail.infomaniak.ch [84.16.66.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99CFB2F25 for ; Wed, 11 May 2022 17:52:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (unknown [10.4.36.107]) by smtp-2-3000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Kyxqh0RDQzMqHtD; Wed, 11 May 2022 16:19:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ns3096276.ip-94-23-54.eu (unknown [23.97.221.149]) by smtp-3-0000.mail.infomaniak.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4Kyxqd6C0Lzlj4cK; Wed, 11 May 2022 16:19:25 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=digikod.net; s=20191114; t=1652278768; bh=/n5oEC4CvxILBZQp6ChxximF4mWD7I5QTdFgyCOlYJY=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=h36XxvDcJBu2sTf7wBmxnAMEehwmVxMmhHKFTptP/LIZsqf5FuDGv21jJRbdukTH1 UjD0Vu6rGibTzYk/3q+3g9c8NVI/S6oNeLJZ08bF9Ks7g+L2BRuDkE9Yk/0kSh2ZCE igV3+abVFVmazKYhYyCl8ju9vWlU5ztV3HAtmGLk= Message-ID: <152da06a-330d-3125-6f41-262e0751f41b@digikod.net> Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 16:19:10 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: llvm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Content-Language: en-US To: Miguel Ojeda Cc: Andy Whitcroft , Brian Norris , Dwaipayan Ray , "Jason A . Donenfeld" , Joe Perches , Kees Cook , Konstantin Meskhidze , Lukas Bulwahn , Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers , Paul Moore , Tom Rix , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev References: <20220506160106.522341-1-mic@digikod.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Micka=c3=abl_Sala=c3=bcn?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Fix clang-format configuration according to checkpatch.pl In-Reply-To: <20220506160106.522341-1-mic@digikod.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Miguel, what do you think about this series? Do you plan to take it for the next merge window? FYI, I plan to use it for Landlock [1] and send it for the next merge window. Could you publish your pending clang-format changes so that I can make sure everything is OK? [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220506160513.523257-1-mic@digikod.net On 06/05/2022 18:01, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > Hi, > > This series brings some improvements to the clang-format configuration > to make it compatible with the checkpatch.pl rules: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/8b6b252b-47a6-9d52-f0bd-10d3bc4ad244@digikod.net > > I also found that the for_each issue has already been talk about here: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHmME9ofzanQTBD_WYBRW49d+gM77rCdh8Utdk4+PM9n_bmKwA@mail.gmail.com/ > > I use these changes for Landlock. > > This is based on v5.18-rc5. > > Previous version: > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220412153906.428179-1-mic@digikod.net > > Regards, > > Mickaël Salaün (5): > clang-format: Update and extend the for_each list with tools/ > clang-format: Update to clang-format >= 6 > clang-format: Fix goto labels indentation > clang-format: Fix empty curly braces > clang-format: Fix space after for_each macros > > .clang-format | 216 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 169 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) > > > base-commit: 672c0c5173427e6b3e2a9bbb7be51ceeec78093a