Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758923AbcLPCAu (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 21:00:50 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f196.google.com ([209.85.192.196]:35423 "EHLO mail-pf0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758905AbcLPCAn (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Dec 2016 21:00:43 -0500 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 11:00:28 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Petr Mladek , Geert Uytterhoeven , Joe Perches , Steven Rostedt , Mark Rutland , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont Message-ID: <20161216020028.GC20445@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> References: <1481806438-30185-1-git-send-email-geert@linux-m68k.org> <20161215162336.GA18152@pathway.suse.cz> <20161216013706.GA20445@jagdpanzerIV.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1589 Lines: 48 On (12/15/16 17:50), Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Sergey Senozhatsky > wrote: > > > > basically I'm talking about a bunch of 80-cols fixups. > > Please don't. I was really going to ask "do we still follow the 80 cols rule?" as the first line in that email, but then I looked into scripts/checkpatch.pl my $max_line_length = 80; and assumed that the rule is still active. > Nobody uses a vt100 terminal any more. The 80-column wrapping is > excessive, and makes things like "grep" not work as well. > > No, we still don't want excessively long lines, but that's generally > mainly because > > (a) we don't want to have excessively _complicated_ lines > > (b) we don't want to have excessively deep indentation (so if line > length is due to 4+ levels of indentation, that's usually the primary > problem). > > (c) email quoting gets iffier and uglier, so short lines always are > preferred if possible > > but in general, aside from those concerns, a long legible line is > generally preferred over just adding line breaks for the very > _occasional_ line. ok. I was 99% sure those 80+ cols lines were not accidental. > At the 100-column mark you almost have to break, because at that point > people may start to be actually limited by their displays, but 80 > columns generally isn't it. > > In fact, I thought we already upped the check-patch limit to 100? I believe someone proposed it at the last kernel summit (or at least attempted to propose it, but I'm not sure if it was successful). thanks. -ss