From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10DC82D23A5; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 08:58:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756976290; cv=none; b=mmM4/9mlwx5VPV+XtC1dyt77A5+IAzeGkF3+gxDITKDVWFrHZKORO4lB6QphwTghdDYMENcEI4aMrJTtQPqR6cA4AELptx/O3vbUbyNfAJRlo2+pR7zD9GGujwIjsTGmd9W8rpmoAWgziTMW5wV0y6QZg6mEzXX9DrxLyTfpj6I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756976290; c=relaxed/simple; bh=t6L8ZlnVN36wvOF7lHp++9Zn1qSba4PbffbnNTtGYlY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Kx4NgfU04VGFMuaDRcuNIbAi7Yv9BUFa7QubJJvdfxSwYvcu+6ozdFNWWZn7RTaFhVhaC8n0WDpbe6EGtG02idnVTTYUS83nCQV0SSqKtteluf8wA6eEft/iXYVd71NZkbYRy10b69C7MuIC+jPedS2jxFv7eaK/gUkekOqspFo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=3E110RiW; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=vNClmjGW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="3E110RiW"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="vNClmjGW" Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 10:58:05 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1756976287; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PHWraxP+ssEoLc7VJUdtZWdkuJMer6cVKoa1HpNeYug=; b=3E110RiWS0C5ryrnh3OGKC9EyVceoxOsVcCOMf1YuxOIVALliajwDLOZjuzFbTfgaWlcLu kiNytkNSBbi32VcAePskuWDBDodgRQrldFj4Tu03TOnorSDpMRbxe8trjszsDqtyWT/AF9 HSv5yLMnVDlmXiCVbDySC8TLw/8zPvIiKEdRkg325rq0g7M5rtFsrDaxj0cbnIouf77qCE so/3Ht1fwXKvLWOh2IkY+V27k7AbzJ9251eyOndrr7v12ZvaODpMJrYHljduN3r2Jq4BUy 3x0ZedMvsCE1B0fwaPCwh5/RXLR5Q0Xwo3GX1xaylda18PKvyrhTRkpO4Zh/BQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1756976287; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PHWraxP+ssEoLc7VJUdtZWdkuJMer6cVKoa1HpNeYug=; b=vNClmjGWAjc9K0tDAof+6W5q0ZtGexcpfHGXsn+OOjt18AaoF9hVCsnvOx/6LReszPAD46 uSWV813wFh9T3SCA== From: Nam Cao To: Gabriele Monaco Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt , linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tomas Glozar , Juri Lelli , Clark Williams , John Kacur Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 16/17] verification/rvgen: Add support for per-obj monitors Message-ID: <20250904085805.X1LXKplC@linutronix.de> References: <20250814150809.140739-1-gmonaco@redhat.com> <20250814150809.140739-17-gmonaco@redhat.com> <20250904082054.W0fQJAQw@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Sep 04, 2025 at 10:39:31AM +0200, Gabriele Monaco wrote: > Mmh, I see what you mean. > I wasn't aware of this textwrap, but what immediately comes to mind is > that we'd end up mixing spaces (python indentation) and tabs (C > indentation). > > While textwrap may handle the case, it doesn't look too readable to me. > > I'd say we can (slowly) transition to using textwrap here but mandate > having \t for tabs to make them explicit (didn't test). > > What do you think? Right, I didn't consider the mixing indentation problem. Using \t isn't much better, it is harder to see how the generated code will look. One idea is using something like clang-format (Documentation/dev-tools/clang-format.rst). It doesn't have to be done in this series of course, I'm fine leaving this be for now. Nam