From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CB53C433F5 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 08:35:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231254AbiCCIgf (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2022 03:36:35 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43952 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229864AbiCCIgc (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2022 03:36:32 -0500 Received: from wnew3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wnew3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.17]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED9F313DE02; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 00:35:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailnew.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 533612B0025D; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 03:35:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 03 Mar 2022 03:35:45 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=atfxuid6e0L2hecp7 attQXvPKmB6bGaKLyrJYHTr/dU=; b=DTsFBzSKEjzfDla//Pr0bprESm1H5jLIn lpW76snRUIOeG5sLR+37XtEcEUgvz7aJbp+j1Sl2d+v1Im9nHGHI4H2b2CXqR5o+ PboPnPV2s6L4XCSfbVUEYAXREHDY7HZ2a7llI+0jlrFzulNkZX+9YgBbt1TwqHIw 3h1wL8GX0wTTi7z32x3fTSbA7odkE8GZFRyOUp/WogvfIA97HoDF3Xez+SVnJXzb BzjdjccIn7LZn1s31iTrnpDQmZOw/Zpe/WejW+2BwBhYT6XYfHNRWmkCWpBNesAU upqgMLezCtReekEhrZQBsvx/jfwCwdtDIUYRFCTpy8ALX6pl/uk2A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddruddthedguddvvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpeffhffvufgjkfhfgggtsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefhihhnnhcu vfhhrghinhcuoehfthhhrghinheslhhinhhugidqmheikehkrdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpefgtdegudfgheehhfeugeeffefhvefgjeevffegfeduffdugeekkeffffej jeehtdenucffohhmrghinhepghhithhhuhgsrdgtohhmnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepfhhthhgrihhnsehlihhnuhigqdhmieek khdrohhrgh X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 03:35:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2022 19:35:25 +1100 (AEDT) From: Finn Thain To: Tom Rix cc: Joe Perches , Bart Van Assche , kashyap.desai@broadcom.com, sumit.saxena@broadcom.com, shivasharan.srikanteshwara@broadcom.com, jejb@linux.ibm.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com, nathan@kernel.org, ndesaulniers@google.com, Konrad Kleine , megaraidlinux.pdl@broadcom.com, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: megaraid: cleanup formatting of megaraid In-Reply-To: <8dd05afd-0bb9-c91b-6393-aff69f1363e1@redhat.com> Message-ID: <233660d0-1dee-7d80-1581-2e6845bf7689@linux-m68k.org> References: <20220127151945.1244439-1-trix@redhat.com> <0adde369-3fd7-3608-594c-d199cce3c936@redhat.com> <46441b86-1d19-5eb4-0013-db1c63a9b0a5@redhat.com> <8dd05afd-0bb9-c91b-6393-aff69f1363e1@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2 Mar 2022, Tom Rix wrote: > >>> Long term, it would be good have a reliable way to automatically fix > >>> either new files or really broken old files. > >> That's really a maintainer preference no? > >> > >> Especially so for any automation. > > > > In practice everything is up to the maintainer. > > > > If some maintainer wants fix their formatting then clang-format should > > just work > > > > It isn't likely they will have time to hand fix every file. > > A follow up issue in the clang project has been raised by Konrad, here > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/54137 > Why request a "leave" option for every style rule? Why not just a "leave" option for the most contentious rules? The response from the developers that anyone who wants to leave existing code unmolested by certain rules should "wake up and smell the coffee" is obnoxious, IMO. Presumably clang-format must grow until it has sufficient program logic and config options to cater to every exception to every rule. How long will that take? Some carefully chosen "leave" options might make the program much more useful in the near term. > Tom > > > > > > Tom > > > >> > >> >