Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 7 Aug 2023 17:58:54 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Cc:     Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] lib/vsprintf: Sort headers alphabetically
Message-ID: <ZNEGrl2lzbbuelV7@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20230805175027.50029-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20230805175027.50029-2-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <ZNEASXq6SNS5oIu1@alley>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZNEASXq6SNS5oIu1@alley>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 04:31:37PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Sat 2023-08-05 20:50:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Sorting headers alphabetically helps locating duplicates, and
> > make it easier to figure out where to insert new headers.
> 
> I agree that includes become a mess after some time. But I am
> not persuaded that sorting them alphabetically in random source
> files help anything.
> 
> Is this part of some grand plan for the entire kernel, please?
> Is this outcome from some particular discussion?
> Will this become a well know rule checked by checkpatch.pl?
> 
> I am personally not going to reject patches because of wrongly
> sorted headers unless there is some real plan behind it.
> 
> I agree that it might look better. An inverse Christmas' tree
> also looks better. But it does not mean that it makes the life
> easier.

It does from my point of view as maintainability is increased.

> The important things are still hidden in the details
> (every single line).
> 
> From my POV, this patch would just create a mess in the git
> history and complicate backporting.
> 
> I am sorry but I will not accept this patch unless there
> is a wide consensus that this makes sense.

Your choice, of course, But I see in practice dup headers being
added, or some unrelated ones left untouched because header list
mess, and in those cases sorting can help (a bit) in my opinion.

TL;DR: I was tolerating unsorted mess (for really long header
inclusion block) up to the point when I realized how it helps
people to maintain the code.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko