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 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 810E8C4CEC7 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:08:21 +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 5216420830 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:08:21 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5216420830 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 B1162202E292D; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:08:20 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: None (no SPF record) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=216.40.44.51; helo=smtprelay.hostedemail.com; envelope-from=joe@perches.com; receiver=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0051.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.51]) (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 21EB8202E291C for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:08:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F77D182CED5B; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:08:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-HE-Tag: prose06_4875ac028f41a X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1878 Received: from XPS-9350.home (unknown [47.151.152.152]) (Authenticated sender: joe@perches.com) by omf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:08:17 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4df0a07ec8f1391acfa987ecef184a50e7831000.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] nvdimm: Use more common kernel coding style From: Joe Perches To: Miguel Ojeda , Jeff Moyer Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:08:16 -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-kernel , Dan Carpenter , linux-nvdimm 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 16:21 +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > As soon as you get accustomed to have formatting done and enforced > automatically, it is great. Other major projects have done so for > quite a while now. Please name the major projects and then point to their .clang-format equivalents. Also note the size/scope/complexity of the major projects. thanks. > If doesn't think it is good enough, please let us know and, if it is > close enough, we can look at going for a newer LLVM to match the style > a bit more. I used the latest one, and quite a bit of the conversion was unpleasant to read. > Also note that one can disable formatting for some > sections of code if really needed. Marking sections _no_auto_format_ isn't really a good solution is it? . _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm