Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 28 May 2020 20:33:40 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        NetFilter <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: clean up kernel_{read,write} & friends v2
Message-ID: <20200528193340.GR23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20200528054043.621510-1-hch@lst.de>
 <CAHk-=wj3iGQqjpvc+gf6+C29Jo4COj6OQQFzdY0h5qvYKTdCow@mail.gmail.com>
 <f68b7797aa73452d99508bdaf2801b3d141e7a69.camel@perches.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f68b7797aa73452d99508bdaf2801b3d141e7a69.camel@perches.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:22:08PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:

> Hard limits at 80 really don't work well, especially with
> some of the 25+ character length identifiers used today.

IMO any such identifier is a good reason for a warning.

The litmus test is actually very simple: how unpleasant would it be
to mention the identifiers while discussing the code over the phone?