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 A00BCC4CEC6 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:51:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7986E20684 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:51:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732791AbfILOvn (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:51:43 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0025.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.25]:38680 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732444AbfILOvn (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 10:51:43 -0400 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92CC1831D72C; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 14:51:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-HE-Tag: yard89_8305e22eeb808 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2937 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 14:51:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <9d4633cf0bbf531393ce170444d607eb2e915f48.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [PATCH v2 3/3] libnvdimm, MAINTAINERS: Maintainer Entry Profile From: Joe Perches To: Dan Williams Cc: Miguel Ojeda , Dan Carpenter , linux-nvdimm , Vishal Verma , Linux Kernel Mailing List Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 07:51:39 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <156821692280.2951081.18036584954940423225.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <156821693963.2951081.11214256396118531359.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> <20190911184332.GL20699@kadam> <9132e214-9b57-07dc-7ee2-f6bc52e960c5@kernel.dk> <5eebafcb85a23a59f01681e73c83b387c59f4a4b.camel@perches.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" User-Agent: Evolution 3.32.1-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2019-09-12 at 07:17 -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > Ok, good to confirm that we do not yet have an objective standard for > coding style. This means it's not yet something process documentation > can better standardize for contributors and will be subject to ongoing > taste debates. Lets reclaim the time to talk about objective items > that *can* clarified across maintainers. No, let's not and just clarify whether or not whitespace style patches are acceptable patch submissions. Coding style fragmentation is not otherwise acceptable to me. nvdimm mandating 2 tab indentation when nvdimm itself is not at all consistent in that regard is also whitespace noise. > As for libnvdimm at this point I'd rather start with objective > checkpatch error cleanups and defer the personal taste items. Fine by me. I do want to avoid documenting per-subsystem coding styles. How about adding something to MAINTAINERS like: A: Accepting patches by newbies or CodingStyle strict and checkpatch could be changed turn off a bunch of whitespace rules on a subsystem basis when run with -f for files or without -f for a patch. Most of this comes down to whitespace like a = b + c where it hardly matters if the CodingStyle mandated space around + is used or foo = bar(baz, qux) where qux position is not really important.