Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: megaraid: cleanup formatting of megaraid
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>,
        Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Konrad Wilhelm Kleine <kkleine@redhat.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
        kashyap.desai@broadcom.com, sumit.saxena@broadcom.com,
        shivasharan.srikanteshwara@broadcom.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com,
        martin.petersen@oracle.com, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        megaraidlinux.pdl@broadcom.com, scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, llvm@lists.linux.dev
References: <20220127151945.1244439-1-trix@redhat.com>
 <d26d4bd8-b5e1-f4d5-b563-9bc4dd384ff8@acm.org>
 <0adde369-3fd7-3608-594c-d199cce3c936@redhat.com>
 <e3ae392a16491b9ddeb1f0b2b74fdf05628b1996.camel@perches.com>
 <46441b86-1d19-5eb4-0013-db1c63a9b0a5@redhat.com>
 <8dd05afd-0bb9-c91b-6393-aff69f1363e1@redhat.com>
 <233660d0-1dee-7d80-1581-2e6845bf7689@linux-m68k.org>
 <CABRYuGk+1AGpvfkR7=LTCm+bN4kt55fwQnQXCjidSXWxuMWsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <95f5be1d-f5f3-478-5ccb-76556a41de78@linux-m68k.org>
 <CANiq72kOJh_rGg6cT+S833HYqwHnZJzZss8v+kQDcgz_cZUfBQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <7368bc3ea6dece01004c3e0c194abb0d26d4932b.camel@perches.com>
From:   Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <9dc86e74-7741-bb8e-bbad-ae96cebaaebc@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Mar 2022 05:46:01 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7368bc3ea6dece01004c3e0c194abb0d26d4932b.camel@perches.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Precedence: bulk


On 3/3/22 3:38 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 00:17 +0100, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 11:44 PM Finn Thain <fthain@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>>> Others might argue that they should always be changed from,
>>>
>>> /*
>>>   * this style
>>>   * of multiline comment
>>>   */
>>>
>>> to
>>>
>>> /* this style
>>>   * of multiline comment
>>>   */
>> In general, for things that the coding style guide talks about, we
>> should follow them, even if some subsystems do not (they can always
>> override in their folder if they really, really want it). So, here for
>> instance, the first one should be used.
> It's up to individual maintainers to each decide on what might be
> considered unnecessary churn for the subsystems they control.

clang-format does not have an opt-in mechanism like indent, it is 
all-or-nothing

What is done is all the settings in .clang-format and the default settings.

The churn level will be very high.

Until clang-format has an opt-in mechanism, I do not think clang-format 
should be used.

.clang-format should be moved to staging/ to reflect its not being ready 
status.

staging/ would be a good long term home. it's content should not need 
backporting and is more likely to have style issues.

Tom

>
> One argument is that churn leads to difficulty in backporting
> fixes to older 'stable' versions.
>
> I think the churn argument is overstated.
>
>